IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 13241 of 2025 Date of Decision: 22.08.2025 _______________________________________________________ Babli …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others … Respondents ______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 Yes. For the Petitioner: Ms. Pragti, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. _______________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Petitioner herein is aggrieved on account of inaction on the part of the respondents inasmuch as they have failed to decide the representation filed by the petitioner with regard to her appointment on compassionate ground. 2. On 24.07.2020, husband of the petitioner, who at the relevant time was working as a Sweeper (Class-IV employee), died in harness. On 17.09.2020, petitioner filed an application enclosing therewith all relevant documents seeking therein compassionate appointment. Though, respondent No.2 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 forwarded the application of the petitioner to respondent No.1, but fact remains that till date no action has been taken. On 31.03.2021, original documents of the petitioner were re-submitted by respondent No.2 to respondent No.1. On 04.10.2022, Secretary, H.P. Board of School Education, Dharamshala, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh was requested by the respondents to verify the correctness of certificates with regard to educational qualification of the petitioner, which were subsequently found to be valid on 09.11.2022. The Chief Conservator of Forest, Shimla requested respondent No.2 to take up the matter with the concerned authority. Since more than four years have passed and nothing was done, petitioner filed representation to the Hon’ble Public Works Minister, dated 03.07.2024. In response to aforesaid representation, petitioner herein came to be apprised that her case has been sent to Principal Secretary (Forests) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, but till date, no final decision has been taken. 3. While putting in appearance on behalf of the respondents, Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, states that final decision, if not already taken, shall be taken expeditiously. 3 4. Since it is quite apparent from the pleadings adduced on record, which are duly supported by the affidavit that for the last four years petitioner has been running from pillar to post for her rightful claim, coupled with the fact that department concerned after having verified educational qualification as well as income of the petitioner has already forwarded the case of the petitioner to the Principal Secretary(Forests) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, this Court sees no impediment in issuing directions to afore authority to consider and decide the case of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass appropriate order, taking note of policy in vogue at the time of death of deceased employee. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate Court of law, if she still remains aggrieved. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge August 22,2025 (shankar)