IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.9309 of 2025 Date of Decision: 4.6.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Rajesh Kumar ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Rocky and Mr. Sourav Sharma, Advocates. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, states that the petitioner would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide his representation (Annexure P-5) in light of CWPOA No. 5536 of 2020, titled as Sanjay Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. (alongwith connected matters), in a time bound manner. 2. Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General, while putting appearance on behalf of the respondents, fairly states that he is not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. - 2 - 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 to consider and decide the representation (Annexure P-5) of the petitioner in light of Sanjay Kumar (supra) expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass a speaking order thereupon. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. June 4, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge