1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP Nos. 3054, 3856, 3858 & 4250 of 2025 Decided on: 02.12.2025. 1. CWP No. 3054/2025 Parkash Chand …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P and others .....Respondents 2. CWP No. 3856/2025 Bhagwant Singh …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P and others .....Respondents 3. CWP No. 3858/2025 Data Ram …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P and others .....Respondents 4. CWP No. 4250/2025 Vijay Singh Rana …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P and others .....Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Abhyendra Gupta, Mr. A.K. Gupta and Mr. Bonit Thakur, Advocates. 1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 For the Respondents: Mr. L.N.Sharma, Additional Advocate General, Mr. Sikander Bhushan, Ms Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocates General and Mr. Rajat Choudhry, Assistant Advocate General for respondents-State. Mr. Tek Ram Sharma, Mr. Tara Chand Chauhan, Advocates for respondent- Principal Accountant General in respective petitions. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) has placed on record office letter No.EDN(SE)-(2)B(2)-Option(NPS to OPS), dated 01.11.2025 that inter alia conveys as under:- “Therefore, in view of the above, it is hereby directed that in this case and other similar cases the factual position of the case may be apprised to AGHP, that they became entitled for pensionary benefits in lieu of benefits of deemed regularization as per orders passed by the Hon’ble High Court of H.P in CWP No.414/2014- titled as Kuldeep Chand vs State & others alongwith LPA No.54/2013 titled as State of H.P versus Om Parkash, and all other connected matters as these cases stand implemented after the approval conveyed by the Govt. and have attained finality.” Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submits that petitioner(s) in all these writ petitions shall be satisfied in case respondents are directed to consider the cases of petitioner(s) in light of above office order within a time frame. This is not objected to by learned counsel for the respondents. Accordingly, these writ petitions are disposed 3 of with directions to respondent No.2/Competent Authority to consider the cases of petitioner(s) for the redressal of grievances raised and reliefs prayed for by them in these writ petitions in accordance with law and in light of above office instructions, within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner(s). Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua December 02, 2025 Judge yogesh