IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.16611 of 2025 Date of Decision: 01.12.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Rajesh Devi & Ors. ……...Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. H.R. Sidhu, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Learned counsel representing the petitioners, on instructions, states that petitioners would be content and satisfied in case their representations are considered and decided in the light of judgments passed in CWP No.7602 of 2010, titled as Om Parkash Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors., CWP No.10729 of 2023, titled as Priya Guleria Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. and CWP No.2045 of 2019, titled as Abida Parveen & Anr. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. 2. While putting in appearance on behalf of respondents, Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, states that he is not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioners and representation, if any, filed by the petitioners shall be considered and decided expeditiously. 3. Consequently, in view of the aforesaid fair stand adopted by learned Additional Advocate General, coupled with the fact that petitioners have already filed representation for redressal of their grievance (Annexure P-11), this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representations of the petitioners in light of judgment passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in Om Parkash, Priya Guleria and Abida Parveen (supra), expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks from today. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass speaking order thereafter. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. December 01, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge 2