2025:HHC:36113 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESHAT SHIMLA CWPOA No.940 of 2019 Decided on: 30.10.2025. __________________________________________________________ Het Ram & Another ...Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & Others ...Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting?. For the petitioners: Ms. Archna Dutt, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Sumit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General. Ranjan Sharma, Judge [Oral] Pursuant to the orders dated 25.11.2020, Learned State Counsel has furnished the Instructions as imparted to him by Conservator of Forests, Mandi, Forest Circle, Himachal Pradesh, dated 29.10.2025. Earlier regularization orders dated 20.12.2014 granting the regularization to the petitioner from 19.09.2012 stands modified by extending regularization from 27.10.2009 to the petitioners Het Ram and Nant Ram. Instructions further indicate that consequent upon the grant of retrospective regularization the monetary benefits 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2025:HHC:36113 - 2 - amounting to Rs.28,173/- [Rupees Twenty Eight Thousand One Hundred Seventy Three] was paid to Het Ram and Rs.22,153/- [Rupees Twenty Two Thousand One Hundred Fifty Three] was paid to Nant Ram as first instalment. Instructions further indicate that the second instalment of Rs.56,346/- [Rupees Fifty Six Thousand Three Hundred Forty Six] stands released in favour of the Het Ram and an amount of Rs.88,614/- [Rupees Eighty Eight Thousand Six Hundred Fourteen] stands released in favour of other petitioner, Nant Ram, by the State Authorities in terms of Treasury Bill dated 16.08.2018. Instructions further indicate that the entire arrear of salary on account of retrospective regularization stands released to the petitioners in terms of the aforesaid instructions. 2. Upon query by this Court, Learned Counsel for the petitioner on instructions of the petitioners does not dispute the above factual aspects. She fairly concedes that since the accruable arrears stands released, therefore, nothing survives in the instant petition. 3. Taking into account the above matrix, the instant petition is disposed of in view of the Instructions 2025:HHC:36113 - 3 - dated 29.10.2025. which are not disputed by Learned Counsel for the petitioners. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (Ranjan Sharma) Judge October 30, 2025 [Shivender]