IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 14865/2026 a/w connected matters Decided on: 01.09.2026 1. CWP No. 14865/2026 Shweta Sharma …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents. 2. CWP No. 14980/2026 Isha Shukla …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents 3. CWP No. 14981/2026 Meera Thakur …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents 4. CWP No. 14982/2026 Punita Sharma …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents 5. CWP No. 14983/2026 Reena Devi …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents 6. CWP No. 14984/2026 Nutan Kumari …Petitioner 2 Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents 7. CWP No. 14985/2026 Bhavna …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents 8. CWP No. 14986/2026 Richa Shukla …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents 9. CWP No. 14987/2026 Renu …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents 10. CWP No. 14988/2026 Shilpa Sharma …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents 11. CWP No. 14989/2026 Byasa Devi …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents 12. CWP No. 14990/2026 Seema Devi …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents 3 13. CWP No. 14991/2026 Ranjna Kumari …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents 14. CWP No. 14992/2026 Tajendra Kumari …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents 15. CWP No. 14993/2026 Rajni Devi …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents 16. CWP No. 14994/2026 Promila Devi …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents 17. CWP No. 14866/2026 Pooja Devi …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents ……………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners: Mr. Hitesh Bali, Advocate, in all the petitions. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 4 For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General, in all the petitions Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J. Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. Petitioners’ grievance is that their respective representation(s) annexed with these writ petitions, seeking applicability of Mohit Sharma & Anr. Vs. State of H.P. & Ors.2 and Inder Singh Thakur & Ors. Vs. State of H.P. & Ors.3 have not been decided till date by the respondents/competent authority. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners would be content, in case, respondents/competent authority are directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners, in accordance with law, within a time bound manner. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection to this prayer. Having regard to the above submissions, but without examining the merits of the matters, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners, in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgments, within a period of six weeks from today. The order so passed be also 2CWP No. 1638 of 2024, decided on 29.11.2024 3CWP No. 4830 of 2023, decided on 07.04.2025 5 communicated to the petitioners. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 1st September, 2026(rohit)