IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.4003 of 2025 Date of Decision: 21.03.2025 _______________________________________________________ Amarjeet Singh …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Ajay Kumar Kashyap, Advocate. 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, for the respondent-State. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, states that the petitioner would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide his claim in light of judgment dated 05.01.2021 passed by Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.3628 of 2020, tilted as Inder Singh vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, with the direction to the respondents to decide the same in a time bound manner. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2. Mr. B.C.Verma, learned Additional Advocate General, while putting appearance on behalf of the respondents, fairly states that he is not averse to afore innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. 3. Consequently, in view of the above, 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 claim of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass detailed speaking order thereupon taking note of the judgment rendered by Division Bench of this Court in Inder Singh’s case(supra) wherein issue otherwise sought to be decided in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate court of law, if he still remains aggrieved. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. p p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge March 21,2025 (shankar)