IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP No. 17069 of 2026 along with CWP Nos. 17071, 17072, 17073, 17074, 17075, 17076, 17077, 17087, 17088, 17089, 17090, 17192, 17194, 17195 and 17197 of 2026. Decided on : 1 st October, 2026 1. CWP No. 17069 of 2026 Mahender Kumar ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ....Respondents. 2. CWP No. 17071 of 2026 Ajay Singh ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ....Respondents. 3. CWP No. 17072 of 2026 Gulshana Bivi ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ....Respondents. 4. CWP No. 17073 of 2026 Satvir Kaur ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ....Respondents. 5. CWP No. 17074 of 2026 Shaneel Kumar ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ....Respondents. 6. CWP No. 17075 of 2026 2 Neelam Kumari ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ....Respondents. 7. CWP No. 17076 of 2026 Ravinder Singh ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ....Respondents. 8. CWP No. 17077 of 2026 Sanjeev Kumar ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ....Respondents. 9. CWP No. 17087 of 2026 Bandana ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ....Respondents. 10. CWP No. 17088 of 2026 Meena Kumari ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ....Respondents. 11. CWP No. 17089 of 2026 Lal Chand ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ....Respondents. 12. CWP No. 17090 of 2026 Susheel Kumar ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ....Respondents. 3 13. CWP No. 17192 of 2026 Shivani Parihar & Ors. ...Petitioners. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ....Respondents. 14. CWP No. 17194 of 2026 Raksha Devi & Ors. ...Petitioners. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ....Respondents. 15. CWP No. 17195 of 2026 Suman Kumari & Ors. ...Petitioners. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ....Respondents. 16.. CWP No. 17197 of 2026 Ritu Sharma & Anr. ...Petitioners. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ....Respondents. Coram: Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Mamta Garg, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. L. N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Notice. Ms. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 4 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matters are heard at this stage. 3. Petitioners seek a direction to the respondents to count their contract services for the purpose of annual increments, seniority, promotion and all other consequential benefits. They seek applicability of the decision rendered in Taj Mohammad and others Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh and others2. It is an admitted position that the “Himachal Pradesh Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Government Employees Act, 2024” has been quashed and set aside in Devinder Kumar & Ors. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr3. It is also a matter of record that State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr. Vs. Devinder Kumar & Ors.4 instituted by the State of Himachal Pradesh against the aforementioned judgment, has been dismissed by the Hon’ble Apex Court on 29.07.2026. While dismissing the appeal, the Hon’ble Apex Court granted four months’ time to the State Government to do the needful in terms of the judgment. 4. In view of above, the present petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider the cases of the petitioners for the grant of relief prayed for by them, in accordance with the time-line indicated by the Hon’ble Apex Court. The petitioners are at liberty to seek 2 CWP No.2004 of 2017 decided alongwith connected matter on 03.08.2023. 3 CWP No. 3361 of 2025 decided alonwith connected matters on 25.04.2026 4 Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 24885/2026 decided on 29.07.2026 5 appropriate remedy for the redressal of their surviving grievances, if any, at an appropriate stage, in case, necessity so arises, in future. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 1st October, 2026. (jai)