IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.4567 of 2024 Date of Decision: 22.09.2025 _______________________________________________________ Pratap Singh …….Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and Others ….Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Hemant Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Though reply on behalf of respondents No.1 & 2/State is on record, whereby claim of the petitioner has been refuted, but before case at hand could be heard and decided on its own merits, learned Senior Counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, states that petitioner would be content and satisfied in case he is permitted to file comprehensive representation for redressal of his grievance with further direction to the respondents to consider and decide the same in time bound manner. 2. Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, states that he is not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 behalf of the petitioner and representation, if any, filed by the petitioner shall be considered and decided in accordance with law. 3. Consequently, in view of the aforesaid fair stand adopted by learned Deputy Advocate General, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition reserving liberty to the petitioner to file comprehensive representation before the competent authority within a period of two weeks for redressal of his grievance, which in-turn, shall be decided by the competent authority, expeditiously, preferably, within a period of three weeks, taking note of judgment passed by Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.11060 of 2017, titled as R.K. Barwal and Others Vs. State of H.P. and Others and judgment passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No.204 of 2023, titled as Mangat Ram Vs. State of H.P. and Others. Ordered accordingly. While doing the needful in terms of instant order, competent authority may also take note of the fact that relief, as prayed for, is claimed to have been granted to other similar situate person namely Mr. Brij Lal. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in the appropriate Court of law, if he still remains aggrieved. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. p` (Sandeep Sharma), Judge September 22, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)