IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 16815/2025 Decided on: 30.10.2025 Sher Singh …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Bonit Parkash, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J 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: - “That the respondents may be ordered to bring services of the petitioner on contractual establishment on completion of 12 years service, as per the policy w.e.f. 1.1.2021 with all benefits incidental thereof.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issue involved in this writ petition, grievance of the petitioner and the relief prayed for has essentially been adjudicated upon in Manmohan Vs. State of 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 H.P.2. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be content in case the respondents are directed to examine the case in light of the aforesaid judgment within a fixed time schedule. Learned Additional 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 the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Manmohan2 by passing appropriate orders, within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 30th October, 2025(rohit) 2 CWP No. 8987/2024 decided on 02.09.2025