IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.2430 of 2025 and connected matters Decided on: 27th March, 2025 _________________________________________________________________ 1. CWP No. 2430 of 2025 Ram Lal ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ 2. CWP No. 2656 of 2025 Tejsvi Dutt ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ 3. CWP No. 2662 of 2025 Sandhya Verma ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioners: Ms. Aruna Sharma, Advocate vice Mr. J.P. Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. L.N.Sharma and Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes - 2 - Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents in all the petitions. 2. These writ petitions have been filed for grant of following almost common reliefs, which have been extracted from CWP No. 2430 of 2025 :- “ 1) The respondents may kindly be directed to Grant the pay scale of Rs.5480-8925/-to the petitioner, with-effect from 29-12-1998 from the date of initial appointment of petitioner, as has been allowed to other counter-parts with further pay revision from time-to-time alongwith arrears and all other consequential benefits with upto date interest @ 9% per annum, in the interest of justice. 2) The respondents may kindly be directed to revised/re-fixe the pension of the petitioner after reaffixing revising the salary of the petitioner in the pay scale of Rs.5480-8925 w.e.f 29-12-1998 and further revision time to time till date and to release all revised pay scale and revised pension to the Petitioner with the basic pay grade, increased increment etc. along with all other consequential benefits..” 3. According to the petitioners, the legal issue involved in the case has already been adjudicated upon. The - 3 - grievances of the petitioners are that their representations Annexure P-7(colly), annexed with the respective writ petitions, have still not been decided by the respondents/competent authority. 4. Once the legal principle involved in the adjudication of present petition has already been decided, it is expected from the welfare State to consider and decide the representation of the aggrieved employee within a reasonable time and not to sit over the same indefinitely compelling the employee to come to the Court for redressal of his grievances. This is also the purport and object of the Litigation Policy of the State. Not taking decision on the representation for months together would not only give rise to unnecessary multiplication of the litigation, but would also bring in otherwise avoidable increase to the Court docket on unproductive government induced litigation. 5. In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from today. The order so passed be also communicated - 4 - to the petitioners. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge March 27, 2025 R.Atal