IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 17178/2026 a/w connected matters Decided on: 05.10.2026 1. CWP No. 17178/2026 Mittal Kumar & Anr. …Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. 2. CWP No. 17180/2026 Attu Devi & Anr. …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents 3. CWP No. 17181/2026 Madan Lal & Anr. …Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents 4. CWP No. 17182/2026 Nisha Kumari & Ors. …Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents 5. CWP No. 17189/2026 Manoj Kumar & Ors. …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents 6. CWP No. 17203/2026 Rajeev Kumar Rana & Ors. …Petitioners 2 Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents 7. CWP No. 17204/2026 Leela Devi & Ors. …Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents 8. CWP No. 17206/2026 Rita Devi & Ors. …Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents 9. CWP No. 17276/2026 Chauhan Rimmy B.S & Ors. …Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents 10. CWP No. 17277/2026 Meena Kumari & Ors. …Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents 11. CWP No. 17162/2026 Ashish Kumar & Ors. …Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents 12. CWP No. 17042/2026 Shubham Gomra …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents 13. CWP No. 17065/2026 3 Anmol Jaryal …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents 14. CWP No. 17045/2026 Mohit Choudhary …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents 15. CWP No. 17048/2026 Biswajit Kumar & Ors. …Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents 16. CWP No. 17054/2026 Smriti Thakur …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents 17. CWP No. 17163/2026 Neeraj Chauhan …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents 18. CWP No. 17166/2026 Akash …Petitioner 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, Mr. Aditya Chauhan, Mr. Sourav Thakur, Advocates, for the petitioners in the respective petitions. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 4 For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Sikander Bhushan, Deputy Advocate General in all the petitions. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J 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. 2. 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. In view of above, the present petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider the cases of the petitioners 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 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 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 5th October, 2026(rohit)