IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.16859 of 2026 alongwith connected matters Decided on: 28th September, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. CWP No.16859 of 2026 Manjit Kaur …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. CWP No.16860 of 2026 Tanu Sharma …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. CWP No.16861 of 2026 Arti …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4. CWP No.16862 of 2026 Reena Kumari …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 5. CWP No.16863 of 2026 Samita Prashar …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6. CWP No.16864 of 2026 Monika …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Reham Tullah, Advocate vice Mr. Vishwa Bhushan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajat Choudhry, Assistant Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Rajat Choudhry, learned Assistant Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. Petitioners’ grievance is that their representations dated 27.04.2026 (Annexure P-4 in all the writ petitions) seeking applicability of Nisha Kumari & 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 3 others Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & anr.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 Assistant 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 the aforesaid representations of the petitioners (Annexure P-4) 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 28, 2026 Judge Mukesh 2 CWP No.3038 of 2022, decided on 21.12.2022