IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.20877 of 2025 Date of Decision: 2.1.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ Kuldeep 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. Mukesh Sharma and Ms. Veena, Advocates. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Before reply, if any, could be called for from the respondents, learned counsel for the petitioner states that issue raised in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated by coordinate Bench of this Court vide Judgment dated 4.9.2023, passed in CWP No. 2171 of 2023, titled as Hem Raj v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. (alongwith connected matters) and as such, petitioner would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide his case in light of aforesaid judgment in a time bound manner. - 2 - 2. Mr. Anish Banshtu, learned Deputy Advocate General, states that he is not averse to the aforesaid innocuous prayer made by the petitioner. 2. Having perused averments contained in the petition, which are duly supported by an affidavit vis-a-vis judgment sought to be relied upon, this Court finds that issue raised in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated by coordinate Bench of this Court in Hem Raj (supra), as such, there appears to be no impediment in issuing direction to the respondents to consider and decide case of the petitioner in light of aforesaid judgment in a time bound manner. 3. Consequently, in view of the above, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide representation of the petitioner (Annexure P-3) in light of judgment, as detailed hereinabove, expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks. 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. All pending applications stand disposed of. January 2, 2026 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge