IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.289 of 2024 Date of Decision: 14.05.2025 _______________________________________________________ Sharda Devi …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr. … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioners: Ms. Aafreen Kaushal, Advocate vice Mr. Raj Thakur, Ajay Vaidya, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, states that the petitioner would be content and satisfied in case she is permitted to make representation to the competent authority for redressal of her grievance, with a further direction to the respondents to decide the same, in a time bound manner. 2. Mr. B.C. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General, fairly states that representation, if any, filed by the petitioner shall be decided in accordance with law. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 3. Consequently, in view of afore innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner and fair stand taken by learned Additional Advocate General, this Court sees no impediment in accepting the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner and accordingly, the present petition is disposed of, with liberty reserved to the petitioner to file representation to the respondents within a period of one week, praying therein for redressal of her grievance as put forth in the instant petition, which in turn, shall be decided by the respondents within a period of four weeks. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass appropriate order. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate court of law, if she still remains aggrieved. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge May 14,2025 (shankar)