IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.9525 of 2025 with CWP Nos. 9526 & 9527 of 2025 Date of Decision: 27.08.2025 _______________________________________________________ 1. CWP No.9525 of 2025 Lal Chand Shastri …….Petitioner Versus Union of India & Ors. … Respondents ______________________________________________________ 2. CWP No.9526 of 2025 Mehar Dutt Gaur …….Petitioner Versus Union of India & Ors. … Respondents 3. CWP No.9527 of 2025 Ram Lal Thakur …….Petitioner Versus Union of India & Ors. … Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Ajay Kumar Dhiman, Advocate. For the Respondent(s):Mr. Janak Raj, Central Government Counsel, for respondent No. 1 in CWP No. 9525 of 2025. Ms. Sheetal Vyas, Central Government Counsel, for respondent No. 1 in CWP No. 9526 of 2025. Mr. Bharat Bhushan, Senior Panel Counsel with Mr. Parveen Bhatti, Central Government Counsel, for respondent No. 1 in CWP No. 9527 of 2025. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondent No. 2-State. Mr. K.D.Shreedhar, Senior Advocate with Ms. Sneh Bhimta, Advocate, for respondents No. 3 & 4. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Though in terms of order dated 06.06.2025, respondents No. 3 & 4 have filed reply, but learned counsel representing the petitioners states that the petitioners would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the petitioners, in a time bound manner. 2. Learned counsel for the respondents are not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioners with regard to disposal of their representation. 3. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with a direction to the respondents No. 3 & 4 to consider and decide the representation of the petitioners expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks from today. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the 3 petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereafter and if need arises, petitioner may also file fresh representation. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge August 27, 2025 (Sunil)