IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.12137 of 2025 Date of Decision: 28.07.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Chanda Chauhan & Ors. ……...Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioners: Ms. Shivangi Sharma, Advocate vice Mr. Vikas Rajput, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocate Generals with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Before reply, if any, from the respondents could be received, learned counsel representing the petitioners, while inviting attention of this Court to judgment passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWPOA No. 8020 of 2019 titled as Neena Puri & others Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & others along with connected matters, states that issue raised in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated by Coordinate Bench this Court in Neena Puri (supra) and as such, petitioners would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider their representations in light of aforesaid judgment in a time bound manner. 2. While putting in appearance on behalf of respondents, Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, states that he is not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioners and representation, if any, filed by the petitioners shall be considered and decided expeditiously. 3. Consequently, in view of the aforesaid fair stand adopted by learned Additional Advocate General, coupled with the fact that petitioners have already filed representation for redressal of their grievance (Annexure P-4), this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the petitioners in light of judgment passed by this Court in Neena Puri (supra), expeditiously, preferably within a period of six 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 petitioners and pass appropriate orders thereafter. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. July 28, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge 2