2025:HHC:1419 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Civil Writ Petition No.15164 of 2024 Date of Decision: 07.01.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Pooja Devi ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Others …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: M/s Rocky and S.S. Jasrotia, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.1 and 2/State. M/s Susheel Gautam and Anshul Gandhi, Advocates, for respondents No.3 & 4. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, states that petitioner shall be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to respondent No.3 to consider and decide pending representation (Annexure P-7) in a time bound manner. 2. Learned counsel representing respondents No. 3 & 4 fairly states that representation, if not already decided, shall be decided expeditiously. 3. Consequently, in view of above aforesaid fair stand adopted by learned counsel for respondents No.3 & 4, present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents No.3 & 4 to consider and 2025:HHC:1419 2 decide the pending representation (Annexure P-7) filed by the petitioner, expeditiously preferably within a period of six weeks. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass speaking order thereafter. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceeding in appropriate Court of law, if she still remains aggrieved. January 07, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), Rajeev Raturi Judge