( 2025:HHC:36072 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 16838/2025 Decided on: 29.10.2025 Rekha Devi …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & others .…Respondents ……………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. L.N.Sharma, Additional Advocate General and Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J Notice. Mr. L.N.Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed for grant of following substantive reliefs:- “i) That the respondents may kindly be directed to make an order of regularization in service of the petitioners against the apposite substantive post, alongwith all incidental there to benefits as given to similarly situated incumbents who have approached the Hon’ble Court earlier by way of CWP No.244/2019 titled as State of H.P and others versus Narender Kumar. ii) That the action of the respondents in denying the consideration and the resultant, regularization to the petitioner as Sweeper or any other equivalent post despite being eligible; despite the availability of vacant posts of Sweeper and in discriminatory manner when similar daily wagers were regularized in the past in respondent 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 department and in other departments may kindly be held illegal, discriminatory and unsustainable. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has preferred a representation (Annexure P-5) to respondent No.2 for redressal of her her grievance, however, the said representation has not been decided till date. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner would be satisfied in case respondents/Competent Authority is directed to decide the aforesaid representation within a fixed time schedule. Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection to the aforesaid prayer. 4. Having regard to the above submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner (Annexure P-5) in accordance with law 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 29th October, 2025 (yogesh)