IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.16764 of 2026 Date of Decision: 25.09.2026 _______________________________________________________ Anil Soneja …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Ashok Kumar Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate Generals with Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Learned counsel representing the petitioner states that the petitioner would be content and satisfied in case his pending representation (Annexure P-3) is decided in a time bound manner. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. 2. Consequently, in view of the above, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents No.1 and 2 to decide the pending representation (Annexure P-3) of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 order, shall affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass speaking order thereupon. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge September 25, 2026 (shankar)