IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 10939 of 2025 Date of Decision:09.07.2025 _______________________________________________________ Hem Raj Thakur …….Petitioner Versus The Comptroller & Auditor General of India & others … Respondents ______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Naresh Kumar Tomar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Tek Ram Sharma, Advocate, for respondent Nos. 2 and 3. _______________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Learned counsel representing the petitioner fairly states that petitioner would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to treat the present petition as a fresh representation on behalf of the petitioner and decide the same, in a time bound manner. 2. Mr. Tek Ram Sharma, learned counsel representing respondent Nos. 2 and 3, fairly states that though earlier representation filed by the petitioner has been already rejected, 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 but direction, if any, issued to decide the representation afresh, same shall be decided expeditiously. 3. Consequently, in view of the above, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to treat the present petition as a fresh representation on behalf of the petitioner and decide the same expeditiously, preferably within a period of two weeks. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall take note of the fact that petitioner had been working since 23rd November, 2017, prior to his disengagement and in future also, while engaging fresh hands through outsource, candidature of the petitioner be also considered. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge July 09, 2025 (shankar)