IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.4328 of 2025 Date of decision: 25.03.2025 Vinod Kumar. ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ...Respondents. Coram: Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner : Mr. R.K. Verma, Advocate. For the respondents : Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive relief(s):- “It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed before this Hon’ble Court that the respondent be directed to continue the petitioner in service till he attains the age of 60 years. Any other writ, order or direction, as may be deemed just and proper in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.” 3. Admittedly, the petitioner has invoked extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the 1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes -2- Constitution of India without even preferring any representation to the competent authority for the redresssal of her 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 25th March, 2025 Judge (Pardeep)