IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 3134 and 3136/2025 Decided on: 10.04.2025 1 CWP No. 3134/2025 Pinku Ram …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. 2 CWP No. 3136/2025 Yadvinder Thakur …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner(s): Mr. Vaibhav Tanwar, Advocate. For the respondent(s): Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent(s). 2. These writ petitions have been filed for the grant of almost common substantive reliefs. Relief clause herein is extracted from CWP No. 3134/2025:- 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 “1. That a writ of mandamus may kindly be issued directing the respondents to grant to the petitioner the benefit of higher stage of pay of Rs. 40100/- from the date the petitioner has completed two years of regular service i.e. 14.01.2024 as per the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Court in CWP No. 1638/2024 titled Mohit Sharma versus State of H.P & others. Further direct the respondents to release to the petitioner all the consequential benefits along with arrears at the rate of 9% per annum. 2. That the respondents may also be directed to release the arrears of pay after fixing the pay of the petitioner at Rs. 40100/- w.e.f the date the petitioner completed two years of regular service i.e. 14.01.2024 along with interest @9% per annum.” 3. According to the petitioner(s), the legal issue involved in the cases has already been adjudicated upon. The grievance(s) of the petitioner(s) are that their respective representation(s) dated 19.12.2024 & 17.12.2024 (Annexure P-3) have still not been decided by the respondents/competent authority. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner(s) would be content in case respondent No.2/competent authority is directed to decide the aforesaid representation(s) within a fixed time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matters, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation(s) of the petitioner(s), in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner(s). 3 Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 10th April, 2025(rohit)