IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 15226 of 2025 Date of decision : 22.9.2025. Seema Devi ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & another ...Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Saurav Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, DAG. Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral): Notice. Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by a judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 1638 of 2024, titled as, Mohit Sharma & another vs. State of H.P. & others, decided on 29.11.2024, Annexure P-2. He further submits that the petitioner has already submitted representation to the competent authority and copy of which has been placed on record as Annexure P-3. It is further 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? -2- submitted that the petitioner shall be satisfied at this stage in case respondent No. 2 is directed to consider and decide the representation Annexure P-3 of the petitioner in a time bound manner in light of the judgment Annexure P-2 (supra). 3. The prayer being innocuous is not opposed. 4. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with directions to respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the case of the petitioners within a period of eight weeks, in light of judgment passed by the Coordinate bench of this Court in CWP No. 1638 of 2024, titled as, Mohit Sharma & another vs. State of H.P. & others, decided on 29.11.2024, Annexure P-2. Needless to say that in case the petitioners are found similarly situated, as the petitioners in CWP No. 1638 of 2024, she shall also be granted the benefits as have been granted to the petitioners in CWP No. 1638 of 2024. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Satyen Vaidya) 22nd September Judge (kck)