IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.15289 of 2024 Decided on: 02nd April, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bhagu Devi …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. G.R. Palsra, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Petitioner seeks benefits of the decision rendered in Satya Devi Versus State of H.P. and others2. 2. Learned Additional Advocate General submits that the judgment in Satya Devi’s2 case has been assailed by the respondents by filing Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.20496/2024. The common decision passed in several other matters connected with Satya Devi’s2 case has also been assailed by the respondents by filing separate Special Leave Petitions including State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. Vs. Inder Pal3. Copy of an order passed by the Hon’ble 1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 CWP No.2274 of 2021, decided alongwith connected matters on 28.05.2024 3 Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.11306/2025 2 Apex Court on 24.03.2025 in several connected Special Leave Petitions with lead case State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. Vs. Inder Pal3 was placed on record, which reads as under:- “1. Delay condoned. 2. Let the notice be issued to the respondent(s) in all the matters. 3. Tag alongwith SLP(C) No.20496/2024. 4. In the meantime the operation of the impugned order(s) is/are stayed.” In view of the fact that operation of impugned order(s) (common judgment rendered on 28.05.2024) in all connected Special Leave Petition has been stayed by the Hon’ble Apex Court, this writ petition is disposed of with direction that benefits, if any, flowing to the petitioner under Satya Devi’s2 case, shall abide by the outcome of the Inder Pal’s3 case instituted by the respondents against the common judgment rendered in Satya Devi’s2 case. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Sandeep Sharma April 02, 2025 Judge Rajeev Raturi