IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 1457/2016 Decided on: 19.09.2026 Leela Devi …..Petitioner Versus UOI & Ors. .…Respondents. ……………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Prantap Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Bharat Bhushan, SPC, for respondents No.1 & 2. Mr. Seema Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents Nos.3 & 4. Ms. Jyoti Chauhan, Advocate vice Mr. Sanjay Dalmia, Advocate, for respondents No.5 & 6. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J The respondents have taken preliminary objections. In their reply, the respondents have disputed the claim of the petitioner on facts. It has also been claimed that the relief sought by the petitioner, in view of the stand taken by the respondents, can only be adjudicated upon in terms of the Industrial Disputes Act. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, seeks liberty to withdraw the instant petition in order to avail appropriate remedy as may be available to her in accordance with law for the redressal of the grievances raised herein. Learned counsel further requests that the 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 period spent in pursuing this litigation be excluded from the period of limitation. 3. In view of the submissions made, the prayer is accepted. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn, with leave and liberty as prayed for. It is clarified that the period spent in pursuing this writ petition shall not come in petitioner’s way for availing appropriate remedy, in accordance with law. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 19th September, 2026(rohit)