IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.16635 of 2025 Date of Decision: 03.12.2025 _______________________________________________________ Vinod Kumar Sharma and Others …….Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and Others ….Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Nitin Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan and Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General, for State. Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Arjun Lall, Advocate, for respondents No.2 and 3. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): Notice. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General and Mr. Arjun Lall, Advocate, appear and accept notice on behalf of respondent No.1 and respondents No.2 & 3, respectively. 2. Petitioners are Class-II employees of respondent- Department. Their grievance is that representation preferred by them on 28.07.2023 through their association followed by another representation dated 19.07.2024 (Annexure P-5, colly.) on the subject matter have still not been considered and decided by the Competent Authority-respondent No.1. Learned counsel for the petitioners 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 submitted that the petitioners would be satisfied in case the respondent No.1/competent authority is directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representations in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned counsel for the respondents are 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 respondent No.1/ Competent Authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners. 4. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. p` (Sandeep Sharma), Judge December 03, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)