IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.15027 of 2025 Date of Decision: 18.09.2025 _______________________________________________________ Smt. Gazal …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Shagun Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Learned counsel for the petitioner states that his client would be content and satisfied in case direction is issued to the respondents to consider and decide representation of the petitioner in light of judgment dated 7.5.2019, passed by Hon’ble Division Bench in CWP No. 244 of 2019, titled as “State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. vs. Narender Kumar, which has been further upheld by Hon’ble Apex Court. Learned Additional Advocate General representing the respondents is not averse to the aforesaid innocuous prayer made by the petitioner. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2. Having perused aforesaid judgment sought to be relied upon vis-à-vis issue raised in the petition at hand, this Court finds that issue raised in the instant petition already stands adjudicated in the aforesaid judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court and as such, no prejudice would be caused to either of the parties in case respondents are directed to consider and decide case of the petitioner in light of the aforesaid judgment. 3. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider and decide representation of the petitioner (Annexure P-5) in light of Narender Kumar’s case (supra), expeditiously, preferably, within six weeks from today. In case, petitioner is found to be similarly situate to the petitioner in the aforesaid judgment, she would be extended similar benefits. Needless to say, authority concerned while doing the needful in terms of the instant order shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass speaking order thereupon. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of (Sandeep Sharma), Judge September 18,2025 (shankar)