IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3671 of 2025 Date of Decision: 18.03.2025 _______________________________________________________ Rajeev Sharma & another …….Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & another … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Parav Sharma and Mr. Rupesh Kumar, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Learned counsel representing the petitioners, on instructions, states that the petitioners would be content and satisfied in case they are permitted to make representations to the respondents for redressal of their grievance in terms of judgment dated 28.09.2023 passed by this Court in CWPOA No.1007 of 2019, titled as Bhagat Ram and others vs. State of Himachal Pradesh alongwith connected matters, which has been further upheld by 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 Division Bench of this Court in LPA No.315 of 2024, tilted as State of Himachal Pradesh versus Bhagat Ram, with the direction to the respondents to decide the same in a time bound manner. 2. Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, while putting appearance on behalf of the respondents, fairly states that representations, if any, filed by the petitioners shall be decided in accordance with law. 3. Consequently, in view of afore innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioners and fair stand taken by learned Deputy Advocate General, this Court sees no impediment in accepting the prayer made on behalf of the petitioners and accordingly, the present petition is disposed of, with liberty reserved to the petitioners to file representation to the respondents within a period of one week, praying therein for consideration of their case in light of judgment passed by this Court in Bhagat Ram case(supra), which in turn, shall be decided by the respondents within a period of eight weeks. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass detailed speaking order thereupon, taking note of the judgment rendered by this Court in Bhagat Ram case (supra), wherein issue otherwise sought to be decided in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated. Liberty is reserved to the 3 petitioners to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate court of law, if they still remain aggrieved. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge March 18,2025 (shankar)