IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.2667 of 2025 Date of Decision: 25.09.2025 _______________________________________________________ Khem Singh …….Petitioner Versus H.P. Power Transmission Corporation Ltd. … Respondent _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Yogesh Kumar Chandel, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Shubham Sood, Advocate. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Though by way of reply to the petition, claim, as put forth by the petitioner, has been refuted by the respondents, but before case at hand could be heard and decided on its own merits, learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, states that his client would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to respondent to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of judgment dated 25.08.2025, passed by this Court in CWP No.2679 of 2025, titled as Pravinder Kumar Vs. H.P. Power Transmission Corporation Ltd., in a time bound manner. 2. Learned counsel representing the respondent fairly states that he is not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 3. Having perused the averments contained in the petition as well as relief prayed therein vis-à-vis judgment sought to be relied upon, this Court finds that the issue raised in the instant petition already stands adjudicated by this Court and as such, no prejudice would be caused to either of the parties, if the respondents are directed to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of judgment supra. 4. Consequently, in view of the above, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of aforesaid judgment 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 being heard to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereupon. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate Court of law, if he still remains aggrieved. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge September 25,2025 (shankar)