IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.21243 of 2025 Date of Decision: 06.01.2026 _______________________________________________________ Sh. Dev Raj …….Petitioner Versus The Registrar, Dr. Y.S. Parmar University of Horticulture and Forestry and Another ….Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Ishita Chauhan, Advocate, vice Mr. Rahul Mahajan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Ramesh Chand Sharma, Advocate. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Before notices, if any, could be issued to the respondents, learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, states that her client would be content and satisfied in case his pending representation (Annexure P-5) is considered and decided by the competent authority in light of judgment rendered by this Court Court in CWP No.4469 of 2022, titled as Mr. Ishwar Dyal Vs. Dr. Y.S. Parmar University of Horticulture and Forestry Nauni, along with connected matters, in a time bound manner. 2. Mr. Ramesh Chand Sharma, learned counsel representing the respondents, fairly states that he is not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner and 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 representation, if any, filed by the petitioner shall be considered and decided in accordance with the aforesaid judgment 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 expeditiously, preferably within a period of six 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 detailed speaking order thereupon taking note of the judgment rendered by this Court in Ishwar Dyal case (supra), wherein issue otherwise sought to be decided in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate Court of law, if he still remains aggrieved. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. p` (Sandeep Sharma), Judge January 06, 2026 (Rajeev Raturi)