IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.13086 of 2025 alongwith connected matters Decided on: 14th August, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. CWP No.13086 of 2025 Sapna …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. CWP No.13092 of 2025 Vishno Kumari …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. CWP No.13126 of 2025 Nand Lal …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. M.A. Safee and Mr. Sameer Miyan, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matters are heard at this stage. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have filed separate representations, annexed with the respective writ petitions, to the respondents for the redressal of their grievances raised in these writ petitions. Petitioners’ grievance is that the representations preferred by them for redressal of their grievances in light of settled legal position have not been adjudicated till date. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners would be content in case the respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matters, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide 3 the aforesaid representations of the petitioners in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners. The writ petitions stand disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua August 14, 2025 Judge Mukesh