IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.2827 of 2025 Date of Decision: 04.04.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Karam Chand Sharma ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Devender K.Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. B.C Verma & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate Generals, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the following main relief:- “(i) A writ of mandamus may kindly be issued and respondents department be directed to count the contractual service rendered by the petitioner before regularization be counted for the purpose of pension and increment with all consequential benefits under old pension scheme and the arrear benefits accrued thereon be paid along with interest @ 12% from the date of accrual till the date of realization in the interest of justice and fair play.” 2. Before reply, if any, from the respondents could be received, learned counsel representing the petitioner, while inviting attention of this Court to judgment passed by Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 2411 of 2019 titled as Jagdish Chand Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors., states that issue raised in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated by Division Bench of this Court in Jagdish Chand (supra) and as such, petitioner would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner in light of aforesaid judgment in a time bound manner. 3. While putting in appearance on behalf of respondents, Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General, fairly states that representation, if any, filed by the petitioner shall be considered and decided expeditiously. 4. Consequently, in view of the aforesaid fair stand adopted by learned Additional Advocate General, coupled with the fact that petitioner has already filed representation for redressal of his grievance (Annexure P-3), 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 representation of the petitioner in light of judgment passed by this Court in Jagdish Chand (supra), expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks. Ordered accordingly. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereafter. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. April 04, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge 2