IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 15394 of 2025 Date of decision : 24.9.2025. Rakesh Kumar ...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. Dheeraj Kanwar, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Addl. A.G. Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral): Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, learned Additional 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 this Court in CWPOA No. 1077 of 2019, titled as, Nitin Kumar vs. State of H.P. & another, decided on 22.8.2022, Annexure-4. He further submits that the petitioner has already submitted a representation to the competent authority and copy of which has been placed on record as Annexure P-6. It is further submitted that the petitioner shall be satisfied at this 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? -2- stage in case respondent No. 2 is directed to consider and decide the representation Annexure P-6 of the petitioner in a time bound manner in light of the judgment Annexure P-4 (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 petitioner within a period of eight weeks, in light of judgment passed by this Court in CWPOA No. 1077 of 2019. Needless to say that in case the petitioner is found similarly situated, as the petitioner in CWP No. 4830 of 2023, he shall also be granted the benefits as have been granted to the petitioners in CWPOA No. 1077 of 2019. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Satyen Vaidya) 24th September, 2025 Judge (kck)