IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.15769 of 2025 Date of Decision: 06.10.2025 _______________________________________________________ Smt. Subhadra Devi …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others ….Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Rakesh Kumar Dogra, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General, for State. Mr. Vivek Singh Thakur, Advocate, for respondent No.3. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): Before notices, if any, could be issued to the respondents, learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, states that his client would be content and satisfied in case her pending representation (Annexure P-9) is considered and decided by the competent authority in light of judgment rendered by Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWPOA No.3191 of 2019, titled as Bhanwar Singh and Others Vs. State of H.P. and Others, along with connected matters, in a time bound manner. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2. Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General representing the respondents No.1 & 2/State and Mr. Vivek Singh Thakur, Advocate, representing the respondent No.3, fairly state that they are not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner and representation, if any, filed by the petitioner shall be considered and decided in accordance with the aforesaid judgment 3. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation (Annexure P-9) of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of six 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 taking note of the judgment rendered by Coordinate Bench of this Court in Bhanwar Singh case (supra), wherein issue otherwise sought to be decided in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate Court of law, if she still remains aggrieved. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. p` (Sandeep Sharma), Judge October 06, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)