Ramesh Chand Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr. CWP No.9591 of 2025 17.11.2025 Present: Mr. Dheeraj Kanwar, Advocate, for the applicant/petitioner. Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocate General, for the respondents-State. While placing on record communication dated 29.10.2025, issued under the signatures of Director, School Education, Himachal Pradesh, enclosing therewith copy of office order dated 11.09.2025 passed by Deputy Director of School Education (Elementary) Kangra at Dharamshala, Himachal Pradesh, Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, states that mandate contained in the judgment, sought to be complied with, stands complied with. Having perused aforesaid documents, which are taken on record vis-a-vis mandate contained in the judgment, sought to be complied with, there appears to be merit in the contention of learned Additional Advocate General. Respondents having considered the case of the petitioner in light of Nitin Kumar’s case, have rejected the same on the ground that petitioner is not similarly situate to Nitin Kumar. Since there was only direction to consider and decide the case of the petitioner and respondents, after having considered the case of the petitioner in light of Nitin Kumar’s case, have rejected the same, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the instant proceedings and accordingly, the same are closed. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate Court of law, laying therein challenge to order passed in purported compliance of the mandate contained in the judgment, sought to be complied with. November 17, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge