IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.18012 of 2026 Decided on: 8th October, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chandra Devi …..Petitioner Versus H.P. State Electricity Board Ltd. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. A.K. Gupta and Mr. Bonit Thakur, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Virender Singh Kanwar, Advocate. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Petitioner instituted CWP No.9671 of 2025 seeking directions to the respondents to re-fix her pay at par with that of her juniors and for correcting the alleged pay anomaly in her pay scale. The writ petition was disposed of on 17.06.2025 with direction to the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in accordance with law within the timelines mentioned therein. 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 2. Pursuant to above, the respondents considered the case of the petitioner and rejected it on 25.05.2026 (Annexure P-1). the said order gives reasons and justifications to the effect that there was no anomaly in the pay scale of the petitioner. 3. Petitioner has instituted this writ petition seeking quashing of the aforesaid order dated 25.05.2026 to the extent that amount recovered from her dues to the tune of Rs.54480/- be refunded to her. 4. Apparently, petitioner has now no grievance to the impugned order to the effect it has declined to bring her pay at par with that of her juniors. The only grievance is in respect of recovery of dues of the petitioner, however, recovery from petitioner’s dues has not been ordered under the impugned order. Impugned order only mentions it as a matter of fact that recovery of Rs.54480/- was worked out and recovered from the petitioner. There is no challenge to any order, under which the amount in question was recovered from the petitioner. In case the petitioner had any grievance to the alleged wrong recovery from her dues, it was for her to have taken appropriate steps in that regard when she instituted CWP No.9671 of 2025. 3 Since the petitioner has no grievance to order dated 25.05.2026 to the extent it declines her prayer for bringing her pay at par with that of her juniors, the present writ petition to stand disposed of. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua October 08, 2026 Judge Mukesh