IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 10122/2026 Decided on: 07.10.2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Surjeet Kumar …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and Ors. .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Vaibhav Tanwar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Ms. Seema Sharma, Deputy Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Even though the reply has not been filed, however, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter has accordingly been heard at this stage. 2. Manoj Kumar & Ors. Vs. State of H.P. & Ors.2 was preferred by the petitioner along with others, seeking decision on their representations, which were based upon Inder Singh Thakur & Ors. Versus State of H.P. & Ors.3. The writ petition was disposed of on 31.10.2025 with direction to the respondents to consider and decide petitioners’ representations in the light of the said judgment. The grievance of the petitioner in the present 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 CWP No. 16986/2025 decided on 31.10.2025 3 CWP No.4830 of 2023, decided alongwith connected matter on 07.04.2025 2 petition is against the office order dated 25.02.2026 (Annexure P- 3), whereby the representation of the petitioner has been rejected. 3. A perusal of the impugned order makes it evident that, while considering the case of the petitioner for grant of higher pay scale, the respondents have not at all discussed the judgment rendered in Inder Singh Thakur3. There is neither any discussion nor any reasoning in the impugned order as to how and why the said judgment is not applicable to the case of the petitioner. For the aforesaid reason, the impugned office order dated 25.02.2026 (Annexure P-3) is quashed and set aside with cost of Rs. 5,000/- to be paid to the petitioner. While considering the case of the petitioner afresh, in accordance with law, respondent Nos. 2/competent authority shall also keep in view the decision rendered in Inder Singh Thakur3. The entire exercise including payment of cost shall be completed within a period of three weeks from today. The order so passed shall also be communicated to the petitioner. The instant petition to stand disposed of in above terms. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 07th October, 2026 rohit