IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.11121 of 2025 Date of Decision: 14.7.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Ram Lal ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Ms. Sakshi Thakur, Proxy Counsel. For the respondent: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No. 1 to 7. Mr. Tek Ram Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.8. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Before reply, if any, could be called for from the respondents, learned Proxy Counsel appearing for the petitioner while referring to judgment dated 10.5.2019, passed by Punjab and Haryana High Court in CWP No. 10238 of 2017 (O&M), titled Jeewan Lata v. State of Punjab and Ors., states that petitioner would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide case of the petitioner in light of afore judgment. 2. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, who has put in appearance on behalf of the respondents, is not averse to the aforesaid innocuous prayer made by the petitioner. 2 3. 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 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 petitioner in light of the aforesaid judgment. 4. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider and decide case of the petitioner in light of Jeewan Lata (supra), expeditiously, preferably, within six weeks from today. In case, petitioner is found to be similarly situate to the petitioner in the aforesaid judgment, he would be extended similar benefits. Needless to say, authority concerned while doing the needful in terms of the instant order shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass speaking order thereupon. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. July 14, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), Manjit Judge