IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.15648 of 2024 alongwith connected matters Decided on: 10th January, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. CWP No.15648 of 2024 Pooja …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. CWP No.15652 of 2024 Babli Devi …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. CWP No.16286 of 2024 Bavlesh Kumar and others …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4. CWP No.16288 of 2024 Kamlesh Kumar and others …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 For the Petitioners: Mr. Vikas Rajput, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the legal issue involved in these cases has already been adjudicated upon; Petitioners have filed representations, annexed with the respective writ petitions as Annexure P-4, for the redressal of their grievances raised in the writ petitions to respondent No.2, but till date the same have not been adjudicated upon; Petitioners would be satisfied in case competent authority is directed to decide the representations in accordance with law within a time bound schedule. The above is not objected to by learned Additional Advocate General. 3. In view of the above, these writ petitions are disposed of by directing respondent No.2/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners in accordance with law 3 within a period of six weeks from today. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioners. The writ petitions stand disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua January 10, 2025 Judge Mukesh