2025:HHC:6046 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3509 of 2025 Date of Decision: 13.03.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Afzal Hussain & Ors. ……...Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioners: Mr. Mohit Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. B.C Verma & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate Generals, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of instant petition, petitioners have prayed for the following main reliefs: “(i) That the service rendered by the Petitioners as Casual Patwaris with effect from 1988 followed by regularization in 1996 may be allowed to be considered and counted for pension and all other service benefits. The Pay and Pension of the Petitioners may be properly fixed. Full arrears on account of said consideration may also be allowed to the Petitioners from due date. (ii) The Respondents may be directed to consider the case of the Petitioners in terms of decision dated 07.08.24 as rendered in CWPOA 4273/20 Krishan Lal versus State and also in view of the fact that relief has already been extended to one Tej Ram as per Annexure P-2 and also to others by virtue of Annexure P-5.” 2. Before reply, if any, from the respondents could be received, learned counsel representing the petitioners, on instructions, states that petitioners would be content and satisfied in case their case is considered and decided in the light of judgment passed by Division Bench this Court in CWP No. 4273 of 2020 titled Krishan Lal Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. 3. While putting in appearance on behalf of respondents, Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General, states that he is not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioners and representation, if any, filed by the petitioners shall be considered and decided expeditiously. 3. Consequently, in view of the aforesaid fair stand adopted by learned Additional Advocate General, coupled with the fact that petitioners have already filed representation for redressal of their grievance (Annexure P-3), this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioners in light of judgment passed by this Court in Krishan Lal (supra), expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of being 2 heard to the petitioner and pass speaking order thereafter. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. March 13, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge 3