IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3882 of 2025 Decided on: 20th March, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Narinder Kumar …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Vaibhav Tanwar, 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. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive relief:- “1. That a writ of mandamus may kindly be issued directing the respondents to consider the petitioner as regular employee of the State from the date of his initial appointment on contract basis and grant her regular wages of pharmacy officer plus other allowances from the date of his initial appointment on contract basis with all the consequential benefits. Further direct the respondents to release to the petitioner all the consequential benefits along with arrears at the rate of 9% per annum.” 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the case of the petitioner and the relief prayed for by him have already been considered & adjudicated upon by this Court in State of H.P. and others Versus Om Prakash2. Learned counsel also submits that the representation dated 25.02.2025 (Annexure P-2) preferred by the petitioner for claiming the above relief is pending consideration with respondent No.2. 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. 4. 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 25.02.2025 (Annexure P-2) in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Om Prakash2 within a period of six weeks from today. The 2 LPA No.54 of 2013, decided alongwith connected matters on 4.10.2019 3 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 March 20, 2025 Judge Mukesh