IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 16518/2026 Decided on: 23.09.2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hitender R. Dulta & Ors. …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Virbahadur Verma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs: - “(i) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly in the nature of Certiorari and/or Mandamus, declaring that the petitioners are entitled to be treated as regularly appointed Trained Gradute Teachers from their respective dates of initial appointment as Para Teachers, being governed by the Himachal Pradesh Education Department Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 1973, and consequently quash and set aside any action or decision of the respondents to the contrary. (ii) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, directing the respondents to reckon the services of the petitioners as regular service from their respective dates of initial appointment and to re-fix their pay and grant all consequential service benefits in accordance with law 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 (iii) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to grant all consequential service benefits flowing from such declaration, including continuity of service, pay fixation, annual increments, qualifying service for pension and retiral benefits, and all other admissible consequential benefits in accordance with law.” Petitioners case is that for the aforesaid grievances, they have preferred their respective representations at Annexure P-7-colly before respondent No.2/competent authority, however, the said representations have not been considered & decided till date. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners would be content, in case, the respondent No.2/competent authority is directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners, in accordance with law, within a time bound manner. Learned Deputy Advocate General has no objection to this prayer. Looking to the limited grievance of the petitioner, the instant petition is disposed of by directing respondent No.2/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners, in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from today. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioners. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 23rd September, 2026 rohit