IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.14008 of 2024 Decided on: 10.01.2025 Sanjay Kumar & others ...Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & another ...Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioners: Mr. Vaibhav Tanwar, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Pranay Pratap Singh, Additional Advocate General. Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral) Notice. 2. Mr. Pranay Pratap Singh, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 3. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the case of the petitioners is squarely covered by the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.2004 of 2017, titled Taj Mohammad vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & others. He further submits that the petitioners have already submitted the representations to respondent No.2 for grant of same benefits as have been held available to similarly situated persons vide judgment in Taj Mohammad (supra), but 2 their representations have not been decided till date. It is also submitted that the petitioners shall be satisfied and contended, at this stage, in case respondent No.2 is directed to consider and decide the representations,Annexure P-3 (colly) of the petitioners in a time bound manner. 4. Record reveals that the petitioners have submitted the representations to respondent No.2 on 10th September, 2024. Copies of the representations are on record as Annexure P-3 (colly). 5. In view of the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners, without adverting to the merits of the case, the petition is disposed of by directing respondent No.2 to consider and decide the representations of the petitioners Annexure P-3(colly) within eight weeks from the date of production of this order by passing detailed and reasoned orders. 6. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. ( Satyen Vaidya ) Judge January 10, 2025 (vt)