IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.8538 of 2025 Decided on: 23rd May, 2025 ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ Sapna …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Yogesh Kumar Chandel, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr.   Rajat   Choudhary,   Assistant Advocate General. ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Rajat Choudhary, learned Assistant Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. With   the   consent   of   learned   counsel   for   the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 3. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive relief:­ “1. That a writ of mandamus may kindly be issued to the respondent department by directing them to grant the petitioner the benefit of Higher Pay Stage by fixing the pay of the petitioner @ Rs 40100/­ per month as on 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 18.05.2019   along   with   all   consequential   benefits including   arrears   of   pay   by   getting   fixation   @ Rs.40100/­  per  month  as  on  18.05.2019  along with interest   on   delayed   payment   of   higher   pay   stage benefit.” 4. Learned   counsel   for   the   petitioner   submitted that the case of the petitioner and the relief prayed for by her are  squarely covered in terms of the recent decision rendered in Inder Singh Thakur & Ors. Versus State of H.P.   &   Ors.2.   Learned   counsel   also   submits   that   the representation dated 04.05.2025 (Annexure P­6) preferred by the petitioner for claiming the above relief is pending consideration   with   respondent   No.3.   Learned   counsel further submits that the petitioner would be content in case respondent No.3/competent authority is directed to decide the aforesaid representation  within a fixed time schedule. Learned Assistant Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 5. Having   regard   to   the   afore­submissions,   but without   examining   the   merits   of   the   matter,   this   writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.3/ competent authority to consider  and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner, in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the 2 CWP No.4830 of 2023, decided alongwith connected matter on 07.04.2025 3 case of Inder Singh Thakur2 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 May 23, 2025 Judge rohit