IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3456 of 2025 Date of decision: 13.03.2025 Sushma Devi. ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Anr. ...Respondents. Coram: Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner : Ms. Anchal Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice.Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive relief(s):- “i). That a writ in the nature of mandamus may : kindly be issued directing respondents to pay compensation to the petitioner equal to the total emoluments which she would have received had she been in service until she has attained the age of 60 years along with consequential retrial benefits in the interest of justice. (ii) That the respondent department may kindly. be directed to decide the representation filed by the petitioner within time bound manner.” 1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes -2- 3. Admittedly, the petitioner has invoked extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India without even preferring any representation to the competent authority for the redresssal of his grievances raised in the writ petition. 4. Confronted with above, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be preferring representation within two weeks from today. In case, such representation is so preferred, the competent authority shall consider and decide the same, in accordance with law, within further period of six weeks. The order so passed shall also be communicated to the petitioner. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua 13th March, 2025 Judge (Pardeep)