2025:HHC:7073 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3961 of 2025 Date of Decision: 21.03.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Bhag Chand ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Ajeet Singh Saklani, 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, for respondents-State. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the following main relief:- “(i) That the respondents may kindly be directed to allow the petitioner to continue her services from the date of his retirement on 31.05.2024 as Class-IV employee upto the age of 60 years alongwith entire service benefits including consequential benefits, as per the judgment rendered by this Hon'ble Court in CWP No.2274 of 2021, Satya Devi Vrs. State of H.P. and others and the other connected matters. (ii) That the respondents may kindly be decided the representation dated 09.01.2025 (Annexure P-3) of the petitioner within time bound manner.” 2. Before reply, if any, from the respondents could be received, learned counsel representing the petitioner, while inviting attention of this Court to judgment dated 28.05.2024 passed by Principal Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 2274 of 2021 titled as Satya Devi Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. alongwith connected matters, states that issue raised in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated by Principal Division Bench of this Court in Satya Devi’s (supra) as such, petitioner would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner in light of aforesaid judgment in a time bound manner. 3. While putting in appearance on behalf of respondents, Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, fairly states that representation, if any, filed by the petitioner shall be considered and decided expeditiously. 4. Consequently, in view of the aforesaid fair stand adopted by learned Additional Advocate General, coupled with the fact that petitioner has already filed representation for redressal of his grievance (Annexure P-3), this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner in light of judgment passed by this Court in Satya Devi (supra), expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of being 2 heard to the petitioner and pass speaking order thereafter. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. March 21, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge 3