IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.1334 of 2025 Decided on: 25th February, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Onkar Singh …..Petitioner Versus Executive Director, HPSEBL and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Rakesh Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Gaurav Chaudhary, Advocate vice Ms. Vandana Misra, Advocate. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Gaurav Chaudhary, Advocate vice Ms. Vandana Misra, learned Standing Counsel, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 3. The writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive relief:- “(i) That the respondent may kindly be directed to grant pension to the Petitioner from due date with all benefits incidental thereof.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the case of the petitioner and the relief prayed for by 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 him have already been considered & adjudicated upon by this Court in Sunder Singh Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.2 and Balo Devi & others Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others3. Learned counsel also submits that the representation dated 22.09.2024 (Annexure P-4) preferred by the petitioner for claiming the above relief is pending consideration with the respondents. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be content in case the respondents/ competent authority(s) are directed to decide the aforesaid representation within a fixed time schedule. Learned counsel for the respondents is not averse to this prayer. 5. 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 respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner dated 22.09.2024 (Annexure P-4) in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgments in the cases of Sunder Singh2 and Balo Devi3 within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. 2 Civil Appeal No.6309 of 2017, decided on 08.03.2018 3 Civil Appeal No.4792 of 2022, decided on 18.07.2022 3 The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua February 25, 2025 Judge Mukesh