IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 14991 of 2025 Date of Decision: 17.09.2025 ____________________________________________________________ Manjur Ali …….Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and Ors. ….Respondents ____________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. A. K. Gupta, Advocate. 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 State. ____________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): Before notices, if any, could issued to the respondents, learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, states that petitioner would be content and satisfied in case he is permitted to file representation to the competent authority for redressal of his grievance, with further direction to the respondents to consider and decide the same, in a time bound manner. 2. Mr. B.C. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General, while putting in appearance on behalf of the respondents, fairly states that he is not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. 3. Consequently, in view of the aforesaid fair stand adopted by learned Additional Advocate General, this Court, without going into 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition reserving liberty to the petitioner to file representation before the competent authority within a period of one week for redressal of his grievance, which in-turn, shall be decided by the competent authority, expeditiously, preferably, within a period of three 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. 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. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge September 17, 2025 (Shamsh Tabrez)