IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.6568 of 2024 Decided on: 17.10.2025 _________________________________________________________________ Harish Kumar and Ors ....Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & Anr. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioners: Mr. Tarun K Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Vishwadeep Sharma, Additional Advocate General. ________________________________________________________________ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Though the respondents have not filed reply, however, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, matter is heard at this stage 2. This petition has been filed for grant of following reliefs: - “A. Issue a writ of Mandamus directing respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners with effect from the date of their initial engagement/ appointment with all consequential benefits on the principle of equality as they are appointed on 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? - 2 - commission basis under same requisition of seats as per un-amended Rules. B. Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to release the entire consequential benefits along with interest 9% per annum from the date of their initial appointment to till the date of realization. C. Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to extend the same and similar benefits as has been extended to Ms Rakhi (LT), Mr Tej Ram (LT) & Mr. Kuldip Chand (TGT, now Lecturer) who were recruited under 37.5% batch wise quota under the same requisition.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that case of the petitioners and reliefs prayed for, have been adjudicated upon in State of H.P. and Ors Vs. Om Prakash2. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners would be content if the cases of the petitioners are considered by the respondents in light of the aforesaid judgment. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection to this prayer. 4. Having regard to above submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to consider the respective cases of the petitioners in light of the aforesaid 2 LPA No.54 of 2013, decided alongwith connected matters on 04.10.2019 - 3 - judgments and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The decision so arrived at, shall be communicated to the petitioners. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge October 17, 2025 R.Atal