IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.12307 of 2025 Date of Decision: 21.08.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Sonu Kumar ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Devender K.Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocate Generals, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the issue raised in the present petition is squarely covered by order dated 3.8.2023 passed by Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 2004 of 2017 titled Taj Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. and his client shall be content and satisfied in case a direction is issued to the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner in light of Taj Mohammad supra, in a time bound manner. 2. Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General is not averse to the innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. 3. Consequently, in view of above, present petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner (Annexure P-3) in light of Taj Mohammad supra, within a period of six weeks. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of this order, shall afford opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass a speaking order thereafter. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate court of law, if he still remains aggrieved. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. March 11, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge 2