IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.4912 of 2025 Decided on: 7th April, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Inderjeet Singh …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Onkar Jairath, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, 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 reliefs:- “i. That the writ in the nature of mandamus or any other directions may kindly be issued, to the respondents to grant the 3rd benefit of ACP on completion of 14 years of regular service in the cadre of TGT from due date i.e. 26.11.2013 with all consequential benefits in terms of the instructions dated 09.08.2012, 07.07.2014 & 09.09.2014. ii. That Writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or directions may be issued to direct the Respondents to also pay the consequential arrears alongwith interest @ 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 reliefs prayed for by him have already been considered & adjudicated upon by this Court in Sanjay Kumar Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others2. Learned counsel also submits that the representation dated 16.02.2025 (Annexure P-5) preferred by the petitioner for claiming the above reliefs is pending consideration with the respondents. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be content in case the respondents/competent authority(s) are 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 the respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner dated 16.02.2025 (Annexure P-5) in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Sanjay Kumar2 within a period of six weeks from today. 2 CWPOA No.5536 of 2020, decided alongwith connected matters on 01.11.2023 3 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 April 07, 2025 Judge Mukesh