IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.1087 of 2026 Date of Decision: 9.1.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ Jaya Verma and Ors. ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Naresh Verma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for the State. Mr. Balram Sharma, Deputy Solicitor General of India, with Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.4-Union of India. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Before reply, if any, could be called for from the respondents, learned counsel representing the petitioners, while inviting attention of this Court to judgment dated 27.10.2025 passed by this Court in CWP No. 814 of 2020 titled Mohan Singh & ors. v. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. (alongwith connected matters), states that issue raised in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated by this Court in Mohan Singh (supra) and as such, petitioners would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide their case in light of aforesaid judgment in a time bound manner. - 2 - 2. While putting in appearance on behalf of respondents, Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, states that he is not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioners. 3. Having perused averments contained in the petition, which is duly supported by an affidavit vis-a-vis judgment sought to be relied upon, this Court finds that issue raised in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated by this Court in Mohan Singh (supra), as such, there appears to be no impediment in issuing direction to the respondents to consider and decide case of the petitioners in light of aforesaid judgment in a time bound manner. 4. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioners in light of Mohan Singh (supra), expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks. Ordered accordingly. In case, petitioners are found to be similarly situate to the petitioners in the aforesaid judgment, they would be extended similar benefits. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass appropriate orders thereafter. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. January 9, 2026 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge