IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.14364 of 2025 Decided on: 5th September, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shanta Devi …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajat Choudhry, Assistant Advocate General, for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr. Naveen K. Bhardwaj, Advocate, for respondent No.3. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Rajat Choudhry, learned Assistant Advocate General and Mr. Naveen K. Bhardwaj, learned counsel, appear and waive service of notice on behalf of respondents No.1 & 2 and respondent No.3, respectively. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 3. Petitioner’s grievance is that her representation dated 24.04.2025 (Annexure P-4) seeking applicability of The State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. Versus Surajmani & Anr.2 has not been decided till date by the 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 Civil Appeal No.1595 of 2025, decided alongwith connected civil appeals on 06.02.2025 2 respondents/competent authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be content in case the respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representation in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents are not averse to this prayer. 4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner dated 24.04.2025 (Annexure P-4) in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Surajmani2 within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua September 05, 2025 Judge Mukesh