IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.18784 of 2025 Decided on: 01.12. 2025 _________________________________________________________________ Bhupender Singh ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. T.S.Chauhan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Surya Chauhan, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Rajat Chaudhary, Assistant Advocate General for respondents No. 1 and 2 Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice is confined to respondents No.1 and 2, which is waived by Mr. Rajat Chaudhary, learned Assistant Advocate General. In view of the grievance of the petitioner, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the order being passed hereinafter, reply to the writ petition is not required to be called from the respondents. With consent of learned counsel for the parties, 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes - 2 - matter is heard at this state. 2. This writ petition has been filed for grant of following substantive reliefs:- “a) A writ of certiorari may be issued to quash the seniority list dated 29.10.2025 circulated vide notification no. PBW-A-E0(3)-5/2024 dated 29.10.2025(Annexure-25) to the extent prejudicial to the petitioner and beyond Sr. no. 273 of Final seniority list dated 29.10.2025. b) A writ of mandamus may be issued to respondent No.1 to correct the petitioner's seniority under M.E. quota from 18.07.2017 or alternatively from 06.01.2018 and place him after Sh. Neeraj Jaswal (Sr. no. 272 regularized on 23.05.2017) and the name of the petitioner may be shown at serial No. 273. c) Direct the respondent No.1 to consider the petitioner for Promotion to the post of Executive Engineer after granting the relief (b) supra after completing Eight years of service from the date of entitlement 18.07.2017-18.07.2025 or regularization (06.01.2018 - 06.01.2026) as per R&P Rules.” 3. Respondents issued an office memorandum on 19.12.2024 (Annexure P-20), circulating tentative seniority list of Assistant Engineers (Civil) as on 31.12.2022. This was followed by another office memorandum dated 20.09.2025 (Annexure P-22). In terms of the office memorandum dated 20.09.2025, previous seniority list dated 19.12.2024 was withdrawn and fresh tentative seniority list of Assistant - 3 - Engineers (Civil) was issued. Petitioner’s name figures at Sr. No.546 of the tentative seniority list issued vide office memorandum dated 20.09.2025. In terms of office memorandum dated 20.09.2025, fifteen days’ time was given to the officials to file objections. Petitioner filed his objections on 30.09.2025 (Annexure P-24). Respondent issues final seniority list vide office memorandum dated 29.10.2025 (Annexure P-25). 3. It is the grievance of the petitioner that his objections taken on 30.09.2025 (Annexure P-24), to the tentative seniority list, issued under office memorandum dated 20.09.2025, have not been decided; Without deciding petitioner’s objections, respondents have issued final seniority list of Assistant Engineers (Civil) under office memorandum dated 29.10.2025. 4. The matter was taken up in the morning session when learned Assistant Advocate General was directed to have instructions as to whether petitioner’s objections dated 30.09.2025 to the seniority list of Assistant Engineers (Civil), circulated under office memorandum dated 20.09.2025, were decided by the respondents. During afternoon session, - 4 - learned Assistant Advocate General, on the basis of instructions, submitted that petitioner’s objections have not been separately decided by the respondents. 5. In view of above, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to the respondent No.1/Competent Authority to consider and decide petitioner’s objections dated 30.09.2025 (Annexure P-24) in accordance with law, within a period of ten days. No further action upon office memorandum dated 29.10.2025 (Annexure P-25) shall be taken by the respondents before deciding petitioner’s objections. The decision so taken, be also communicated to the petitioner. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge December 01, 2025 R.Atal