IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.755 of 2026 Date of Decision: 08.01.2026 ____________________________________________________________ Shri Narender Kumar …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Others ….Respondents ____________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Sameer Miyan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan and Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General, for State. ____________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): Before notices, if any, could be issued in the instant proceedings, learned counsel for the petitioner states that his client would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide representation of the petitioner in light of judgment dated 28.05.2025 passed in CWP No.5390/2024 titled as Surya Prabha & Ors. Vs State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors., in time bound manner. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to the aforesaid innocuous prayer made by the petitioners. 2. Having perused aforesaid judgment sought to be relied upon vis-à-vis issue raised in the petition at hand, this Court finds that issue raised in the instant petition already stands adjudicated in the aforesaid judgment rendered by the Coordinate Bench of this Court and as such, no prejudice would be caused to either of the parties in case respondents are 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 directed to consider and decide case of the petitioner in light of the aforesaid judgment. 3. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner (Annexure P-6) in light of Surya Prabha (supra), expeditiously, preferably, within four weeks from today. In case, petitioner is found to be similarly situate to the petitioner in the aforesaid judgment, he would be extended similar benefits. Needless to say, authority concerned while doing the needful in terms of the instant order shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass speaking order thereupon. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge January 08, 2026 (Rajeev Raturi)