IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.952 of 2024 Decided on: 22nd November, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajender Kumar and another …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. M.A. Safee, Mr. Pranav Kaushal and Mr. Sameer Miyan, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajat Choudhry, Assistant Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 2. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive relief:- “(i) That Your Lordships may further graciously be pleased to 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 FR 22(I)(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 2500/2021 titled as Ranjit Singh and Others V/s State of Himachal Pradesh along with other connected matters, wherein it has been held that the Head Teachers are entitled for promotional increment in view of the provisions of FR 22(I)(a)(1) of FRSR.” 1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the case of the petitioners and the reliefs prayed for by them have already been adjudicated upon in Surya Prabha and others Versus State of H.P. and others2. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners would be content in case the respondents are directed to examine their respective cases in light of the aforesaid judgment within a fixed time schedule. Learned Assistant Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the respective cases of the petitioners 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 November 22, 2025 Judge Mukesh 2 CWP No.5390 of 2024, decided on 28.05.2025