IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.1368 of 2025 Decided on: 29th December, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Usha Devi and others …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Mohit Sharma, Advocate vice Mr. Manish Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy 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 reliefs:- “a) That the respondents may be directed to count the service of the petitioners on contract basis from the date of their initial appointment followed by their regularization without any break, towards seniority and all other service benefits, with all consequential benefits; b) That the impugned order dated 23.09.2023, Annexure P-10 may be quashed and set aside, and the respondents may kindly be directed to fix the pay of petitioners at Rs.30,500/- on completing 2 years’ service by counting the same from the date of their initial appointment as Patwari, with arrears of salary 1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 and all consequential benefits, with interest at market rate on delayed payment.” 3. Learned vice counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the case of the petitioners and the reliefs prayed for by them are covered by the decision rendered in Mohit Sharma & Anr. Versus State of H.P. & Ors.2. That similar relief as prayed for by the petitioners in the instant case was also granted in Nabhanshu Thakur & Ors. Versus State of H.P. & Anr.3. Learned vice counsel submits that the petitioners are also entitled for the similar reliefs as have been granted in Nabhanshu Thakur3. Learned vice counsel further submits that the petitioners would be satisfied in case the respondents are directed to examine their respective cases in light of the aforesaid judgments within a fixed time schedule. Learned Deputy 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 judgments in Mohit Sharma2 and Nabhanshu Thakur3 by passing 2 CWP No.1638 of 2024, decided on 29.11.2024 3 CWP No.1542 of 2025, decided on 31.07.2025 3 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 December 29, 2025 Judge Mukesh