IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.14435 of 2025 Date of Decision: 18.9.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Nihal Chand ……...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. Loveneesh Singh Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, states that the petitioner would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide his representation (Annexure P-5) in light of Mohd. Abdul Kadir and Anr. v. Director General of Police, Assam and Ors (2009) 6 SCC 611 and CWP No. 4489 of 2009, titled as Ravi Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. decided on 14.12.2009, in a time bound manner. 2. Mr. B.C. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General, while putting appearance on behalf of the respondents, fairly states - 2 - that he is not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. 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 (Annexure P-5) of the petitioner in light of Mohd. Abdul Kadir and Ravi Kumar (supra) 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 petitioner and pass a speaking order thereupon. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. September 18, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge