IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 14542 of 2026 Decided on: 25 .08 .2026 Ramanand …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 _____________________________________________________ For the petitioner : Mr. Ashish Verma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Pushpender Jaswal, Additional Advocate General for respondents- State. : Mr. Mukul Sood, Advocate for respondents No. 3 to 5. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) Notice. Mr. Pushpender Jaswal, learned Additional Advocate General and Mr. Mukul Sood, learned Counsel, accepts notice on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2 and respondents No. 3 to 5, respectively. 2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the order passed by the authority dated 13.05.2026 (Annexure P-8), in terms whereof, the prayer of the petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment stands rejected on the basis of income criteria. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court to Annexure P-11, which is an Office 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 Memorandum dated 01.07.2026 and submitted that the respondent- State has taken a decision to reconsider the cases which stand rejected on the ground of income criteria for the purpose of appointment on compassionate grounds. The representation which has been filed by the petitioner now, i.e. Annexure P-12, be ordered to be decided in the light of office memorandum Annexure P-11. 4. Mr. Mukul Sood, learned Counsel for respondents NO. 3 to 5, submits that the representation of the petitioner shall be decided by the competent Authority within a period of six weeks from today. His statement is taken on record. 5. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with directions to the respondents/competent Authority to take a fresh call on the representation of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds in light of Annexure P-11. It is clarified that in case the petitioner is entitled for appointment on compassionate grounds in light of P-11, then the prior rejection of the petitioner's case shall not come in the way of the respondents in conferring appropriate relief upon the petitioner. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge August 25 , 2026 (narender)