2026:HHC:10540 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.15396 of 2024 Decided on: 07.04.2026 Anuradha & others … Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ____________________________________________________ _ For the petitioners: Mr. Dilip Sharma, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Mohit Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional Advocate General Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) When this case was taken up for consideration, learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that at this stage, interest of justice would be served in case the petitioners are directed to decide the representation preferred by the petitioners, i.e. Annexure P-9, dispassionately in light of judgment dated 29.11.2024, passed by this Court in CWP No.1638 of 2024, titled Mohit Sharma & Anr. Versus State of H.P. & Ors., within some reasonable time. 2. As the request made by is innocuous, therefore, the petition is disposed of with the direction that representation of the petitioners (Annexure P-9) be decided in light of judgment passed by this Court in CWP No. 156 of 2025, titled Seema and others Versus State of H.P., as well as the subsequent orders passed by the Authority in CWP No.1638 of 2024, titled Mohit Sharma & Anr. Versus State of H.P. & Ors., within a period of six weeks from today. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2026:HHC:10540 It is clarified that this Court has not made any observation on the merits of the case. The Authority shall independently apply its mind and pass appropriate orders. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge April 07, 2026 (Rishi)