IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.750 of 2025 and connected matters. Decided on: 10th January, 2025 _________________________________________________________________ 1. CWP No. 750 of 2025 Suman Lata …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr …..Respondents. ______________________________________________________ 2. CWP No. 840 of 2025 Om Piari …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr …..Respondents ______________________________________________________ 3. CWP No. 848 of 2025 Latesh …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr …..Respondents ______________________________________________________ 4. CWP No. 744 of 2025 Seema …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr …..Respondents ______________________________________________________ - 2 - 5. CWP No. 746 of 2025 Pardeep Kumar …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr …..Respondents ______________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioners: Mr. Balwant Singh Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Y. P. S. Dhaulta and Mr. L.N.Sharma, Dalip K. Sharma and Mr. Amandeep Sharma, Additional Advocates General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. L.N.Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents in all the writ petitions. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the legal issue involved in the case has already been adjudicated upon; Petitioners have filed representations, annexed with the respective writ petitions as Annexure P-3, for the redressal of their grievances raised in the writ 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes - 3 - petitions, but till date the same have not been adjudicated upon; Petitioners would be satisfied in case competent authority is directed to decide the representations in accordance with law within a time bound schedule. The above is not objected to by learned Additional Advocate General. 3. In view of the above, these writ petitions are disposed of by directing the respondents/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 order so passed be also communicated to the petitioners. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge January 10, 2025 R.Atal