1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.15594 of 2025 a/w CWP No.15597 of 2025 Date of decision: 26.09.2025 1. CWP No.15594 of 2025 City Heart Guest House. ...Petitioner. Versus Union of India & Ors. ...Respondents. 2. CWP No.15597 of 2025 Sunpark Boutique and Spa. ...Petitioner. Versus Union of India & Ors. ...Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice B.C. Negi, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioners : Mr. Sanjeev Sood and Mr. Vivek Thakur, Advocates, in both matters. For the respondents : Mr. Janak Raj and Mr. Shyam Singh, Central Government Counsel, for respondents No.1 & 2, in respective petitions. : Mr. Arsh Rattan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.3 & 4, in both matters. G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice (Oral) Notice. Mr. Janak Raj, learned Central Government Counsel and Mr. Arsh Rattan, learned Deputy Advocate General, accept notice on behalf of respondents No.1 & 2 and 3 & 4 respectively. -2- 2. Counsels agreed that the judgment passed on 16th July, 2025 in LPA No.169 of 2025 titled Union of India and another Vs. Atul Sharma and others covers the issue in question. The relevant portion reads as under:- “10. Learned Single Judge found that the appellant-Union of India could not in the first set of cases, deny the fact that the applications had been forwarded during currency of the Scheme and therefore, consideration had not been done. In such circumstances, he came to the conclusion that at least the consideration had to be made as per the terms of the policy dated 23.04.2018 (Annexure P-1). Thus, we cannot find any fault as such with the reasoning of the learned Single Judge to this extent. 11. Counsel for Union of India also admits that since each and every individual case will have to be considered within the parameters of the said policy, it would be appropriate that a decision making is done by the Empowered Committee by fixing a timeframe as such. We are also of the considered opinion that the findings as such that the consideration was to be done by the Empowered Committee, thus cannot be faulted in any manner, once it is the case of the State also that they had forwarded their cases to the Empowered Committee. If that is so, then the decision making as such had to be done as per the parameters of the notification and as noticed above, has now been done in one case though, the rejection is here. 12. In such circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that present LPAs are liable to be disposed of in the above terms along with writ petitions that each and every individual case has to be considered afresh by the Empowered Committee. Let the said exercise be done within a period of four months from today. Needless to say that it will be open to the applicants, as such, to seek their remedy in accordance with law in case there is rejection of their case.” -3- 3. Accordingly, these writ petitions stand disposed of in the same terms. 4. All pending applications stand disposed of accordingly. (G.S. Sandhawalia) Chief Justice (Bipin Chander Negi) Judge 26th September, 2025 (Pardeep)