IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.17177 of 2025 Decided on: 4th November, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Raksha Devi …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Shivom Vashista, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 3. Petitioner’s grievance is that her representation dated 17.09.2025 (Annexure P-7) seeking applicability of State of H.P. and others Versus Om Prakash2 has not been decided till date by the respondents/competent 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 LPA No.54 of 2013, decided alongwith connected matters on 4.10.2019 2 authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be content in case the respondents/ competent authority(s) are directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representation in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner dated 17.09.2025 (Annexure P-7) in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Om Prakash2 within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua November 04, 2025 Judge Mukesh