IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.2507 of 2025 Date of Decision: 08.09.2025 __________________________________________________________ Dharamveer …….Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and Others ….Respondents __________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Bhim Raj Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for State. Mr. Sunny Modgil, Advocate, for respondent No.4. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, states that petitioner would be content and satisfied in case he is permitted to make representation before the competent authority, praying therein for redressal of his grievance and respondents may be directed to decide the same in time bound manner. Learned Additional Advocate General states that he is not averse to afore innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. 2. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is disposed of, reserving liberty to the petitioner to file representation to the competent authority within a period of two days, praying therein for redressal of his grievance, which in-turn shall be decided by the afore 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 authority expeditiously, preferably, within a period of ten days. 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. Interim order, if any, stands hereby vacated. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge September 08, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)