IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP Nos.20362 & 20364 of 2025 Decided on: 24.12. 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. CWP No. 20362 of 2025 Shambhu Nath & Anr …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and Anr .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. CWP No. 20364 of 2025 Raj Kumar and Ors …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and Anr .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Rocky, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajat Chaudhary, Assistant Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sushil Kukreja, Judge (oral) Notice. Mr. Rajat Chaudhary, learned Assistant Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents in both the petitions. 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matters are heard at this stage. 3. Petitioners’ grievance is that their representations, annexed with the writ respective writ petitions, seeking applicability of judgment rendered in CWP No. 8148 of 2022, titled Yashwant Kumar Vs. State of H.P. & Ors, decided alongwith connected matters on 21.03.2024, have not been decided till date by the respondents/competent authority. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners would be content in case the respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representations in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Assistant Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matters, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Yashwant Kumar within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners. 3 The writ petitions stand disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. (Sushil Kukreja) December 24, 2025 Judge R.Atal