IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP Nos. 20712/2025 a/w connected matters Decided on: 31.12.2025 1. CWP No. 20712/2025 Pradeep Kumar …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. 2. CWP No. 20718/2025 Kehar Singh …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. 3. CWP No. 20788/2025 Yudhveer Singh …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. 4. CWP No. 20790/2025 Shakti Chand …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. 5. CWP No. 20818/2025 Dolma …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. 2 Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners: Mr. Bonit Thakur, Advocate, in all the petitions. For the respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General, in all the petitions. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J These writ petitions have been filed for the grant of almost common substantive reliefs. Relief clause herein is extracted from CWP No. 20712/2025: - “That the respondents may be ordered to revised work charge status granted to the petitioner w.e.f. the date he completed 8 years service with all benefits incidental thereof and also in view of the judgment rendered in Surajmani’s case as well as the order passed in the case of similarly situated employees Sh. Tek Chand and others and the pay of the petitioner may be ordered to be fixed accordingly from the due date. ” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submitted that the issue involved in these writ petitions, grievance(s) of the petitioner(s) and the reliefs prayed for have essentially been adjudicated upon in The State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. Versus Surajmani & Anr.2. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner(s) would be 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 Civil Appeal No.1595 of 2025, decided alongwith connected civil appeals on 06.02.2025 3 content in case the respondents are directed to examine the cases of the petitioner(s) in light of the aforesaid judgment within a fixed time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matters, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the cases of the petitioner(s) in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment by passing appropriate orders, within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner(s). Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 31st December, 2025(rohit)