IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.16869 of 2026 alongwith connected matters Decided on: 29th September, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. CWP No.16869 of 2026 Bhisham Chand …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. CWP No.16870 of 2026 Shailja Mehta and another …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. CWP No.16871 of 2026 Chaman Lal and others …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4. CWP No.16872 of 2026 Manoj Mehta and others …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5. CWP No.16873 of 2026 Rakesh Kumar and others …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 6. CWP No.16877 of 2026 Jodham Singh …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7. CWP No.16888 of 2026 Hemant Kumar and others …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8. CWP No.16889 of 2026 Sushil Kumar and another …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9. CWP No.16891 of 2026 Rekha Bhardwaj and others …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Yogesh Kumar Chandel, Advocate. 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 3 For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. Petitioners’ grievance is that their representations (Annexure P-6 in all the writ petitions) seeking applicability of Inder Singh Thakur & Ors. 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. 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 2 CWP No.4830 of 2023, decided alongwith connected matter on 07.04.2025 4 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 29, 2026 Judge Mukesh