GITA DEVI AND OTHERS v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS
CWP/16671/2024 · 2025-02-24
Sandeep Sharma
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 21373 (HP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 21373 (HP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2025:HHC:3258 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No.16671 of 2024 Date of Decision: 24.02.2025 _______________________________________________________ Gita Devi and others
…….Petitioners
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh & others … Respondents _______________________________________________________
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1
For the Petitioners: Mr. Adarsh K. Vashista, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral):
Learned counsel representing the petitioners, on instructions, states that the petitioners would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation dated 09.08.2024 (Annexure P-4) of the petitioners, in a time bound manner.
2.
Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, while putting appearance on behalf of the respondents, fairly states that he is not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioners.
1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2 2025:HHC:3258
3.
Consequently, in view of the above, 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 pending representation dated 09.08.2024 (Annexure P-4) of the petitioners expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass detailed speaking order thereupon. Liberty is reserved to the petitioners to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate court of law, if they still remain aggrieved. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
p
(Sandeep Sharma),
Judge February 24, 2025 (shankar)