IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 10495 of 2025 Date of Decision: 1.7.2025 _______________________________________________________ Surekha Sharma …….Petitioner Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh & others … Respondents ______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. V.B. Verma, and Mr. Mukul Sharma, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. _______________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Learned counsel for the petitioner states that petitioner would be content and satisfied in case direction is issued to the respondents to consider and decide her representation in light of judgment dated 7.7.2023, passed in CWP No. 2500 of 2021, titled as “Ranjit Singh and Ors. v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors (alongwith connected matters). Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to the aforesaid innocuous prayer made by the petitioner. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 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 pe- titioner in light of the aforesaid judgment. 3. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is disposed of with direction to the competent authority to consider and decide pending representation of the petitioner in light of Ranjit Singh’s case (supra), expeditiously, preferably, within four weeks from today. In case, petitioner is found to be similarly situate to the petitioners in the aforesaid judgment, she would be extended similar benefits. Needless to say, authority concerned while doing the need- ful in terms of the instant order shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass speaking order thereupon. Pending appli- cation(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge July 1, 2025 manjit