2025:HHC:3227 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Civil Writ Petition No.1095 of 2025 Date of Decision: 24.02.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Mohan Lal ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Others …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Mohit Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for State. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, states that the petitioner would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation dated nil (Annexure P-3) of the petitioner, in a time bound manner. 2. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, while putting appearance on behalf of the respondents, fairly states that he is not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. 3. Consequently, in view of the above, 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 2025:HHC:3227 2 pending representation (Annexure P-3) of the petitioner, expeditiously, preferably 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 detailed speaking order thereupon. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate Court of law, if he still remains aggrieved. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. February 24, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), Rajeev Raturi Judge