IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.1858 of 2025 Date of Decision: 19.03.2025 _______________________________________________________ Ishwar Dass …….Petitioner Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh and another … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Rupesh Kumar, Proxy Counsel vice Mr. Gurmeet Bhardwaj, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Ravi Chauhan and Ms. Santosh Dogra, Deputy Advocate Generals. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for following main relief:- “ i) That act of the respondents in not counting the services rendered by the petitioner on contract basis as TGT(Medical) for the purpose of seniority and incremental benefits may kindly be held unconstitutional, discriminatory, arbitrary, unreasonable, unjustified, unwarranted, invalid, violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the law laid down by this Hon’ble Court vide judgment passed by this Hon’ble Court on dated 3.8.2023 in CWP No.2004/2017 a/w CWP No.629/2018 upholding the judgment dated 25.5.2017 passed by the erstwhile learned H.P. Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No.3337/2016; 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 ii) That the respondents may kindly be directed to count the entire services of the petitioner, including initial service on contract basis followed by regularization towards seniority alongwith all consequential benefits being a covered matter by the law laid down by this Hon’ble Court vide judgment dated 3.8.2023 in CWP No.2004/2017 a/w CWP No.629/2018 upholding the judgment dated 25.5.2017 passed by the erstwhile Ld. H.P. Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No.3337 of 2016, whereby the services rendered by the employees concerned on contract basis has been ordered to be counted for the purpose of seniority alongwith consequential benefits and the respondent department is under legal duty to count the contract services of the petitioner for the purpose of annual increments as well as pensionary benefits.” 2. Before the reply could be received on behalf of the respondents, learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, states that his client would be content and satisfied in case his pending representation dated 22.11.2024 (Annexure P-4 ) is considered and decided by the competent authority in light of judgment rendered by Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.2004 of 2017 titled as Taj Mohammad vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, in a time bound manner. 3. Having regard to the nature of prayer made in the instant petition and order proposed to be passed, this Court sees no necessity to call for the reply on behalf of the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy 3 Advocate General, who while accepting notice on behalf of the respondents, fairly states that pending representation, if any, filed by the petitioner shall be decided expeditiously in accordance with law. 4. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation dated 22.11.2024 (Annexure P-4 ) of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of eight weeks. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass detailed speaking order thereupon taking note of the judgment rendered by Division Bench of this Court in Taj Mohammad case (supra), wherein issue otherwise sought to be decided in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate court of law, if he still remains aggrieved. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge March 19,2025 (shankar)