IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.15174 of 2025 Decided on: 19.09.2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Prem Chand …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and Ors .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Mohit Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. L.N.Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No. 1 to 3. Ms. Komal Chaudhary, Advocate, for respondent No.4. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. L.N.Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General and Ms. Komal Chaudhary, learned counsel, appear and waive service of notice on behalf of the respective respondents. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 3. Petitioner’s grievance is that he has preferred a representation seeking pension on the strength of 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 decisions rendered in Sunder Singh Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.2 and Balo Devi & others Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others3 . His representation was forwarded by respondent No.3 to respondent No.2 on 12.08.2025 (Annexure P-1), however, it continues to remain under consideration and no decision has been taken thereupon. 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 Additional Advocate General is 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 in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Sunder Singh2 and Balo Devi3 within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. 2 Civil Appeal No.6309 of 2017, decided on 08.03.2018 3 Civil Appeal No.4792 of 2022, decided on 18.07.2022 3 The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Septemebr 19, 2025 Judge R.Atal