IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.5836 of 2024 Decided on 12th May, 2026 Susheela Verma …Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others …Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Ms. Rashmi Parmar, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional Advocate Genera, for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr. Dhananjay Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.3. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the relief being prayed for by the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court passed in CWP No. 3833 of 2022, titled Raj Kumari Vs. State of H.P. & Ors., alongwith other connected matters, decided on 23.04.2024. She prays that this case be disposed of in light of the directions passed by this Court in the abovesaid writ petition. 2. Though the factum of the issue involved in the said petition and judgment being relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner, could not be denied by the learned counsel for the respondents, but they submit that the order may be passed by this Court made with the observation that the same will be subject to any legal right that the respondents will have to exercise against the order. Observed accordingly. 3. This petition is disposed of with the observation that the findings returned in Raj Kumari Vs. State of H.P. & Ors. (supra), should be construed to have been passed in the present petition also and respondents are directed to grant similar benefits to the petitioner, as stand granted to petitioner Meera Thakur and Mukesh Kumari, which are referred to in judgment dated 23.04.2024, in CWP No. 3833 of 2022, titled Raj Kumari Vs. State of H.P. & Ors., alongwith other connected matters. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge May 12, 2026 (Vinod)