IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.4591 of 2025 Date of Decision: 14.5.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Sushila Devi ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Adarsh K. Vashista, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for the State. Mr. Rangil Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.4. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the petitioner, states that petitioner would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide case of the petitioner in light of judgment dated 6.11.2020, rendered by Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 3544 of 2019, titled as “State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. v. Surendra Sharma and Ors.” (alongwith connected matter) in a time bound manner. Mr. B.C. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General, is not averse to the aforesaid innocuous prayer made by the petitioner. - 2 - 2. Having perused aforesaid judgment sought to be relied upon vis-à-vis issue raised in the petition at hand, this Court finds that issue raised in the instant petition already stands adjudicated in the aforesaid judgment and as such, no prejudice would be caused to either of the parties in case respondents are directed to consider and decide case of the petitioner in light of the aforesaid judgment. 3. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider and decide representation (Annexure P-5) of the petitioner in light of Surendra Sharma (supra), expeditiously, preferably, within four weeks. In case, petitioner is found to be similarly situate to the petitioner in the aforesaid judgment, she would be extended similar benefits. Needless to say, authority concerned while doing the needful in terms of the instant order shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass a speaking order thereupon. All pending applications stand disposed of. May 14, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge