IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.19773 of 2025 Date of Decision: 16.12.2025 _______________________________________________________ Mohd. Moin …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Aditi Rana, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Ravi Chauhan and Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocate Generals. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Notice. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and accepts notice on behalf of respondents. 2. Petitioner seeks regularization of his services. His case is that he preferred a representation alongwith others on 17.04.2025 (Annexure P-5) to respondent No.3 seeking regularization but the aforesaid representation has not been considered and decided as yet. Reliance in support of his claim has been made upon in Jaggo versus Union of India and others. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be content in case the respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to consider and 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 decide the aforesaid representation in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 3. 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 17.04.2025 (Annexure P-5) in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Jaggo 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. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge December 16,2025 (shankar)