IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 2598/2022 Decided on: 07.05.2025 Vivek Mehta & Ors. …Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Happy and Mr. Deepanshu Bindal, Advocates. For the respondents: Mr. P.K. Nadda, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J CMP No.9701/2025 Dismissed as not pressed. CMP No.9700/2025 Allowed and disposed of. CWP No. 2598/2022 With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive relief:- “That in view of the above mentioned facts and circumstances, the present writ petition may kindly be allowed and the condition No.2 of regularization with immediate effect vide notification dated 5.8.2020 may kindly be modified and the respondents may kindly be directed to regularize the services of the present petitioners w.e.f. 1.4.2018 alongwith all consequential benefits by issuing writ of mandamus in the interest of justice and fair play.” 3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submits that during the pendency of the writ petition, the issue raised by the petitioners and the reliefs prayed for by them were adjudicated in Yashwant Singh & Ors. Vs. State of H.P. & Anr.2 Learned Senior Counsel further submits that the said decision squarely applies to the facts of the instant case. That on the basis of aforesaid decision, Niketa Chauhan Vs. State of H.P. & Anr. 3was also decided on 26.04.2024. The judgment in Niketa Chauhan3 has been implemented by the respondents-State. Learned Senior Counsel also submits that the petitioners would be satisfied, in case, they are permitted to prefer individual representations to the Director Education, Himachal Pradesh, whereafter, Director Education/Competent Authority be directed to consider and decide the representations to be made by them, in accordance with law and keeping in view the aforesaid 2CWP No. 342/2021 a/w connected matters decided on 31.08.2022 3CWP No. 8788/2023 decided on 26.04.2024 3 decisions, in a time bound schedule. Prayer is not opposed by learned Additional Advocate General. 4. Having regard to the above submissions, but without going into the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of by ordering that the petitioners shall be at liberty to prefer individual representations within a period of four weeks to the Director Higher Education Himachal Pradesh/Competent Authority, who shall in turn, consider and decide the same, in accordance with law and keeping in view the aforesaid decisions, within a further period of eight weeks. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioners. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 07th May, 2025(rohit)