IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.15967 of 2026 alongwith connected matters Decided on: 15th September, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. CWP No.15967 of 2026 Rajeev Kanwar …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. CWP No.15981 of 2026 Rekha Devi and another …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. CWP No.15985 of 2026 Anamika …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4. CWP No.15989 of 2026 Rajesh Kumari …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 For the Petitioners: Mr. Devender K. Sharma, Advocate in CWP No.15967 of 2026. Mr. Vivek Thakur, Advocate, in CWP No.15981 of 2026. Mr. Narendra Guleria and Mr. Loveneesh Singh Thakur, Advocates, in CWP No.15985 of 2026. Mr. Vikas Rajput, Advocate, in CWP No.15989 of 2026. For the Respondents: Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. Petitioners’ grievance is that their representations (annexed with the writ petitions) seeking applicability of Mohit Sharma & Anr. Versus State of H.P. & Ors.2 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 the respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representations in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 2 CWP No.1638 of 2024, decided on 29.11.2024 3 3. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matters, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to 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 judgment within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners. The writ petitions stand disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua September 15, 2026 Judge Mukesh