Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/19871/2026 on 5 November 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No.19871 of 2026 alongwith
CWP No.19873 of 2026
Decided on: 5th November, 2026
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. CWP No.19871 of 2026 Anita
…..Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. and others
.....Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. CWP No.19873 of 2026 Priyanka
…..Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. and others
.....Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coram
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Hitesh Bali, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.
2. Petitioners preferred representations (Annexure P-3) to respondent No.2-the Director Health Services,
1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.
Himachal Pradesh, seeking applicability of Inder Singh Thakur & Ors. Versus State of H.P. & Ors.2. Even though the representations were preferred to respondent No.2, however, the same were decided by respondent No.3 and rejected on 23.05.2026 (Annexure P-4).
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that respondent No.3 had no jurisdiction to decide the representations of the petitioners seeking higher pay scale in light of Inder Singh2. That apart, office orders dated 23.05.2026 do not even discuss the implication of Inder Singh2 vis-à-vis the factual position of the case of the petitioners.
4. In view of this, the impugned rejection by respondent No.3 of the cases of the petitioners seeking applicability of Inder Singh2, i.e. Annexure P-4, dated 23.05.2026, cannot be held to be in order. Therefore, notwithstanding the impugned decision at Annexure P-4, dated 23.05.2026, these writ petitions are disposed of with direction to respondent No.2 to consider and decide the representations of the petitioners (Annexure P-3) afresh in accordance with law and keeping in view the decision rendered in Inder Singh2 within a period of six weeks from
2 CWP No.4830 of 2023, decided alongwith connected matter on 07.04.2025
today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners.
The writ petitions stand disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua November 05, 2026
Judge Mukesh