IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 19970/2025 Decided on: 18.12.2025 Sumitra Chauhan …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. ……………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Parkash Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J Notice. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. Petitioner is serving as Lecturer (Hindi) at Model Senior Secondary School, Kupvi, District Shimla. She seeks a direction to the respondents to promote her to the post of Principal as per office letter dated 02.12.2025 (Annexure P-5) with all consequential benefits. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had joined the respondents-department on contract basis on 28.11.1994; Her services were regularized on 01.01.2005; At the time of petitioner’s regularization, seniority was assigned to her at 1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 serial No.6320; After regularization, petitioner’s seniority number was revised. Learned counsel further submitted that on 02.12.2025, in terms of Annexure P-5, the respondents initiated the process for making promotion of eligible Lecturers to the post of Principal; The concerned authorities were directed to send Annual Confidential Reports of the eligible Lecturers in the enclosed list for considering their cases for promotion to the posts of Principal. Petitioner’s grievance is that her name, is not part of the list of Lecturers, being considered for promotion to the post of Principal, whereas some of her juniors found place in the aforesaid list. Learned counsel also submitted that the petitioner had preferred a representation in this regard to respondent No.2/competent authority on 05.12.2025 (Annexure P-6), but no response has been communicated to the petitioner till date; That the petitioner would be content, in case, respondent No.2/competent authority is directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner, in accordance with law, within a time bound manner. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection to this prayer. 3. In view of above submissions, this writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent No.2/competent authority to consider and decide petitioner’s representation dated 05.12.2025 (Annexure P-6), in accordance with law, within a period of two weeks 3 from today. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioner. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 18th December, 2025(rohit)