IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.646 of 2026

Decided on: 07.01.2026

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Monika & Ors. …..Petitioners

Versus

State of H.P. and Ors. .....Respondents

-----------------------------------------------o--------------------------------------

Coram

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal tDua

Whether approved for reporting?1

For the Petitioner: Mr. Pranav Kaushal and Mr. Sameer

o Miyan, Advocates.

For the Respondents: Mr. Rajat Chaudhary, Assistant

Advocate General.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

Notice. Mr. Rajat Chaudhary, learned Assistant

Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on

Hbehalf of the respondents.

Taking into consideration the order impugned

herein, decision rendered in Inder Singh Thakur & Ors Vs. State of H.P. & Ors2, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the order being passed hereinafter, reply

1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.

2 CWP No. 4830 of 2023, decided alongwith connected matter on 07.04.2025.

to this writ petition is not required to be called from the respondents. With consent of learned counsel for the

parties, matter is heard at this stage.

2. Petitioner had instituted Monika & .Ors. Vs.

State of H.P. and Anr3, seeking applicability of Inder Singh Thakur2. The writ petition was disposed of on 08.05.2025 with directions to the respondents oto consider the case of the petitioner in light of Inder Singh Thakur2 by passing appropriate orders in accordance with law within a time frame. u Purosuant to the directions issued in Monika3, respondents passed consideration order on 15.12.2025 (Annexure P-5), rejecting the case of the petitioner with the hfollowing reasoning: -

“And Whereas, the petitioner has completed their two years regular services during October, 2021 i As per the dates mentioned in the above Table-1).

H Accordingly, in compliance of Himachal Pradesh Civil Services (Category/Post wise Revise Pay) Rules, 2012, the revised pay band Grade pay of 10300-34800+GP 4200 was granted to the petitioners during October, 2021 Now therefore, in view of the above facts and

circumstances stated above the petitioners are not entitled for the revised Grade Pay Scale from the (Revised Pay) 1st amendment Rules, 2022 notified on 3 CWP No. 4066 of 2025, decided a/w connected matters on 08.05.2025

06.09.2022. Accordingly, after considering the facts on record in the particulars that petitioners have already availed the Higher Grade Pay during October, 2021. .

Thus, the representations of the petitioners Pare rejected.”

According to the respondents, petitioner has completed two years of regular service on 01.10.2021. He was granted revised Pay Band + Gorade Pay in compliance to the H.P. Civil Services (Categ ory/Postwise Revised Pay) Rules, 2012, therefore, petitioner was not held entitled to the benefits flowing from Revised Pay Scale, 2022, notified on

06.09.2022 o

3. The aforesaid reasoning has already been turned down in Inder Singh Thakur2. Paras from Inder Singh hThakur2, relevant in the context of reasoning given by the respondents for rejecting the cases of the petitioners, are as under: -

4(iv). The notification dated 03.01.2022 promulgating the Revised Pay Rules, 2022 w.e.f. 01.01.2016, does not stipulate that those who were appointed on regular basis prior to 03.01.2022, are to be excluded from the purview of the said notification. In fact, Rule 7 of the Revised Pay Rules, 2022, notified on 03.01.2022 provides the mechanism for fixation of pay in the revised pay structure. Rule 7(I) provides for fixation of pay of Government employees recruited/appointed before 01.01.2016, whereas Rule 7(II) of the notification dated 03.01.2022 provides for fixation of pay of regular Government employees recruited/appointed on or after 01.01.2016 till the date of issuance of the notification.

Rule 7 of notificati