IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.19812 of 2025 Decided on: 1st October, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Umesh Kumar Narta …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Atharv Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajat Choudhry, Assistant Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Even though the respondents have not filed reply, however, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 2. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:- “(i) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may very kindly be issued and the respondents may kindly be directed to consider the Refresher course and Orientation programme done by the petitioner during his contractual service as well as after regularization of his services for the purpose of granting benefit of Career Advance Scheme from the date of completion of 04 years of 1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 regular service i.e. 2020 along with all the consequential benefits in the interest of law and justice. (ii) That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to consider and extend the benefit of Career Advancement Scheme to the petitioner strictly in terms Annexure P5 and Annexure P7 with all consequential benefits.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the grievance of the petitioner and the issue raised by him has already been adjudicated upon in Punam Chauhan & Anr. Versus State of H.P. & Anr.2. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be satisfied in case the respondents are directed to consider and decide his case in light of above decision within a fixed time- schedule. Learned Assistant 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 case of the petitioner in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment by passing appropriate order, within a period of four weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. 2 CWP No.1251/2023, decided on 22.08.2023 3 The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua October 01, 2026 Judge Mukesh