IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.17806 of 2025 Decided on: 18.11.2025 _________________________________________________________________ Krishan Sood ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Tarun K Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. L.N.Sharma, Additional Advocate General. ________________________________________________________________ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. L.N.Sharma, learend Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. With consent of learned counsel for the parties, matter is heard at this stage. This petition has been filed for grant of following relief: - “A). issue a writ of mandamus directing respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner with effect 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? - 2 - the date of his initial engagement/appointment with all consequential benefits on the principle of equality as he is appointed on 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 his initial appointment to till the date of realization. ” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that case of the petitioner is covered in terms of judgment rendered in State of H.P. and others Versus Om Prakash2, State of H.P. and others Versus Anju Devi3, State of H.P. and others Versus Manju Devi4 and Ajay Kumar Thakur and Ors Vs. State of H.P. and Another 5. In this regard, petitioner has made a representation dated 24.03.2025 (Annexure P-5). Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be content in case respondent /competent authority is directed to decide the aforesaid representation within a fixed time schedule. Learned counsel for the respondents is not averse to this prayer. 4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition 2 LPA No.54 of 2013, decided alongwith connected matters on 4.10.2019 3 LPA No.4059 of 2013, decided alongwith connected matters on 4.10.2019 4 LPA No.4060 of 2013, decided alongwith connected matters on 4.10.2019 5 CWPOA No.1695 of 2019 decided on 04.10.2024 - 3 - is disposed of with direction to respondent / competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner in accordance with law, keeping in view the aforesaid judgments, within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge November 18, 2025 R.Atal