IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.4274 of 2025 Decided on: 9th May, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ravi Dutt …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Shivom Vashista, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional 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:- “i) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued directing the Respondents to count the services rendered by the Petitioner on contract basis prior to his regularization as qualifying service for the purpose of pension under CCS Pension Rules, 1972 and for the purpose of annual increments, in the interest of justice.” 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is under instructions to restrict petitioner’s claim in this petition only for counting the contractual service rendered by him for the purpose of release of pensionary benefits under the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972. Learned counsel further submitted that the above relief prayed for by the petitioner has already been considered and adjudicated upon in State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr. Versus Sheela Devi2. Learned counsel also submits that the representation dated 07.12.2024 (Annexure P-4) preferred by the petitioner for claiming the above relief is pending consideration with respondent No.2/competent authority. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be content in case respondent No.2/ competent authority is directed to decide the aforesaid representation within a fixed time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 5. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2/ competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner dated 07.12.2024 2 SLP (Civil) No.10399/2020, decided on 07.08.2023 3 (Annexure P-4) for counting the contractual service rendered by him for the purpose of release of pensionary benefits, in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment 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 09, 2025 Judge Mukesh