IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.264 of 2025 Decided on: 4th January, 2025 _________________________________________________________________ Sunita Devi & Anr. ....Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & Anr. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioners: Mr. Rakesh K. Dogra, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Sikandar Bhushan, Deputy Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Sikandar Bhushan, Deputy Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed for grant of following substantive reliefs:- “(i) That this Hon'ble Court may very kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes - 2 - direction, directing the respondents to count the services rendered by the petitioners on contract basis for the purpose of seniority & promotion etc. with all consequential benefits after their regularization, as their initial date of appointment as JOA(IT) i.e; 12.07.2016 and 05.08.2016 respectively on contract basis was after following the procedure prescribed in the Recruitment and Promotion Rules. (ii) That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction, directing the respondents to re-draw the seniority and assign the petitioners' seniority position at appropriate place after taking into consideration the entire length of service rendered by them from the date of their initial appointment on contract basis i.e; 12.07.2016 and 05.08.2016 and justice be done. (iii) That this Hon'ble Court may further be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction, directing the respondents to consider the cases of petitioners for their promotion to the next higher post strictly in accordance with the Recruitment and Promotion Rules. (iv) That this Hon'ble Court may again be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction, directing the respondents to pay due & admissible arrears to the petitioners flowing out of grant of the relief Nos. (i) to (iii) above alongwith interest 9% per annum from the date it became due till its' realization.” - 3 - 3. According to the petitioners, the legal issue involved in the case has already been adjudicated upon. The grievance of the petitioners is that their representations dated 03.10.2024 (Annexures P-4 and P-5,) 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 - 4 - weeks from today. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioners. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge January 4, 2025 R.Atal