IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.4081 of 2025 Date of Decision: 08.05.2025 _______________________________________________________ Mahander Lal …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Another ….Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Ganesh Barowalia, proxy counsel, for Mr. Munish Dhatwalia, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, states that the petitioner’s case is squarely covered by the judgment dated 07.07.2023 passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No.2500 of 2021, titled as Ranjit Singh and Others Vs. State of H.P. and Others, and as such, petitioner would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of aforesaid judgment, in a time bound manner. 2. Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General, while putting appearance on behalf of the respondents, fairly states that he is not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 the petitioner. 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 he case of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks in light of Ranjit Singh (supra). 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 a speaking order thereupon. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate Court of law, if he stills remain aggrieved. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. p` (Sandeep Sharma), Judge May 08, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)