IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.6093 of 2025 Date of Decision: 11.4.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Kana Singh ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Ms. Samriti Sharma, Advocate, vice Mr. Sandeep K. Pandey, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the petitioner, states that petitioner would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide representation dated 27.2.2025 (Annexure P-3) having been filed by the petitioner in light of judgment dated 7.7.2023, rendered by Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 2500 of 2021, titled as “Ranjit Singh and Ors. v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors.” in a time bound manner. Mr. B.C. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General, is not averse to the aforesaid innocuous prayer made by the petitioner. - 2 - 2. Having perused aforesaid judgment sought to be relied upon vis-à-vis issue raised in the petition at hand, this Court finds that issue raised in the instant petition already stands adjudicated in the aforesaid judgment rendered by the coordinate Bench of this Court and as such, no prejudice would be caused to either of the parties in case respondents are directed to consider and decide case of the petitioner in light of the aforesaid judgment. 3. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider and decide representation (Annexure P-3) having been filed by the petitioner in light of Ranjit Singh’s case (supra), expeditiously, preferably, within four weeks. In case, petitioner is found to be similarly situate to the petitioner in the aforesaid judgment, he would be extended similar benefits. Needless to say, authority concerned while doing the needful in terms of the instant order shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass a speaking order thereupon. All pending applications stand disposed of. April 11, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge