IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.349 of 2026 Date of Decision: 06.01.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ Hari Om ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Anr. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Prantap Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol Additional Advocate General, Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Before reply, if any, from the respondents could be received, learned counsel representing the petitioner, while inviting attention of this Court to judgments passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No.5090 of 2022, titled as Umesh Jaswal Vs. State of H.P. & others and in CWPOA No.1077 of 2019, titled as Nitin Kumar Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr., states that issue raised in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated by Coordinate Bench of this Court in Umesh Jaswal and Nitin Kumar (supra) and as such, petitioner would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner in light of aforesaid judgment in a time bound manner. 2. While putting in appearance on behalf of respondents, Mr. Anish Banshtu, learned Deputy Advocate General, fairly states that representation, if any, filed by the petitioner shall be considered and decided expeditiously. 3. Consequently, in view of the aforesaid fair stand adopted by learned Deputy Advocate General, coupled with the fact that petitioner has already filed representation for redressal of his grievance (Annexure P-5), 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 representation of the petitioner in light of judgment passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in Umesh Jaswal and Nitin Kumar (supra), expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks from today. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass speaking order thereafter. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. January 06, 2026 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge 2