2026:HHC:20075 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.7680 of 2026 Date of decision: 26.05.2026 Sansar Chand. ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. …Respondents. Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Tarun K. Sharma and Mr. Ranbir Rathore, Advocates. For the respondent : Mr. J.S. Guleria, Deputy Advocate General. Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge Notice. Mr. J.S. Guleria, Deputy Advocate General, appears, waives and accepts service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the claim raised in present petition is squarely covered by judgment passed in CWP No.9321 of 2025, titled as Vijay Parmar & Ors. vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors., decided on 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes -2- 06.04.2026, and representation dated 11.04.2026 (Annexure P-5), submitted by the petitioner, is pending consideration before respondent No.3-Director, School Education, H.P. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be satisfied in case aforesaid representation is decided in a time-bound manner in light of judgment rendered in Vijay Parmar’s case (supra). 3. Learned Deputy Advocate General submits that, subject to correctness of the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner with respect to applicability and similarity of Vijay Parmar’s case (supra) to the case of the petitioner, the respondents, especially respondent No.3-Director, School Education, H.P., shall decide the representation of the petitioner within the time granted by this Court, by taking into consideration the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. In view of above, as agreed, present petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.3-Director, School Education, H.P., to consider and decide representation dated 11.04.2026 (Annexure P-5) submitted by the petitioner, on or before 15.07.2026, by passing a speaking and reasoned order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, if so desired, and also taking into consideration the judgment rendered in Vijay Parmar’s case -3- (supra). In case, the petitioner is found to be similarly situated to the petitioners in Vijay Parmar’s case (supra), the same benefits, if any, as extended therein, shall also be extended to the petitioner herein. The decision, so arrived, at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. 5. Needless to say, in case, the grievance of the petitioner still survives, the petitioner shall be at liberty to avail appropriate remedy in accordance with law, including filing a fresh petition. 6. Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of in the same terms. (Vivek Singh Thakur) Judge (Ranjan Sharma) Judge 25th May, 2026 (Pardeep)