Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J
1. Notice. Mr. Rajat Choudhry, learned Assistant Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.
2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage.
3. Petitioner's grievance is that his representation dated 08.09.2025 (Annexure P-6) seeking applicability of Dinesh Kumar and Ors. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors.[ CWP No.18542/2025, decided on 28.11.2025] in order to claim the relief for stepping- up of his pay at par with his juniors, has not been decided till date by the respondents/competent authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be content in case the respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representation in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Assistant Advocate General is not averse to this prayer.
4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner dated 08.09.2025 (Annexure P-6) in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Dinesh Kumar[CWP No.18542/2025, decided on 28.11.2025]within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner.
The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.
