IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.15262 of 2024 Decided on: 6th January, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Neelam Kumari and others …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. H.R. Sidhu, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 3. The writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive relief:- “(i) That writ of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the respondent department to grant all service benefits to the petitioners being regular employees w.e.f. the initial date(s) of joining in the department as contractual 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 appointees and also to count the said period for their seniority for sake of retiral benefits and pensionary benefits in view of the judgment dated 03.08.2023 passed by this Hon’ble Court in CWP No.2004/2017, titled as Taj Mohammad and others vs. The State of Himachal Pradesh and others (Annexure P-3).” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respective cases of the petitioners and the relief prayed for by them have already been considered & adjudicated upon by this Court in Sh. Taj Mohammad and others Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh and others2. Learned counsel also submits that the representation dated 19.07.2024 (Annexure P-5) preferred by the petitioners for claiming the above relief is pending consideration with the respondents. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners would be content in case the respondents/competent authority is directed to decide the aforesaid representation within a fixed time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General submits that the respondents are not averse to consider the case of the petitioners in light of the aforesaid judgment, however, all rights and contentions of the parties be left open for decision. 2 CWP No.2004 of 2017, decided alongwith connected matter on 03.08.2023 3 5. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioners dated 19.07.2024 (Annexure P-4) in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Taj Mohammad2 within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners. It is clarified that all rights and contentions of the parties are left open. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua January 06, 2025 Judge Mukesh