IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.7646 of 2025 Decided on: 17th October, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Kiran Rana and others …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Tarun K. Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Sikander Bhushan and Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocates General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Even though the respondents have not filed reply to the writ petition, however, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 2. This writ petition has been filed for grant of following substantive reliefs:- (i) Issue the writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing and setting aside the order 26.04.2025 (annexure P-3), wherein the respondents have illegally and arbitrary have rejected the case of petitioner for the grant of promotional increment to the post of Head Teacher. 1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 (ii) Issue the Writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to grant the petitioners 3% promotional increment w.e.f. the date of their promotion as Head Teacher, in view of the provisions of FR22(1)(a)(1) of FRSR with all consequential benefits @9% P.A as has been laid down in case vide judgment dated 07.07.2023 passed in CWP No. 2500/2021 titled as Ranjit Singh and Others versus State of Himachal Pradesh alongwith other connected matters, wherein it has been held that the Head Teachers are entitled for promotional increment in view of the provisions of FR22(1)(a)(1) of FRSR.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that even though the respondents have rejected the case of the petitioners for grant of promotional increment vide impugned office order dated 26.04.2025, however, they are required to consider the case of the petitioners afresh for the reason as subsequent to the impugned order, the matter was adjudicated upon and the said relief was granted in Surya Prabha and others Versus State of H.P. and others.2 Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners will be satisfied in case the the respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to consider the cases of the petitioners afresh for grant of promotional increment to the post of Head Teacher in light of the aforesaid judgment. Learned Additional 2 CWP No.5390 of 2024, decided on 28.05.2025 3 Advocate General appearing for the respondents is not averse to this prayer. 4. In view of above, the impugned office order dated 26.04.2025 is quashed and set-aside with direction to respondent No.3/competent authority to consider and decide the case of the petitioners for grant of promotional increments to the post of Head Teacher in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Surya Prabha2 by passing appropriate order, within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua October 17, 2025 Judge yogesh