CWP/20842/2025 of KHIMI DEVI Vs THE STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER on 31 December 2025

1. CWP No.20842 of 2025 Khimi Devi

…..Petitioner

Versus

State of H.P. and Anr

.....Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. CWP No.20844 of 2025 Rama Devi

…..Petitioner

Versus

State of H.P. and Anr

.....Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. CWP No.20846 of 2025 Vishan Dass

…..Petitioner

Versus

State of H.P. and Anr

.....Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. CWP No.20850 of 2025 Mukesh Kumar

…..Petitioner

Versus

State of H.P. and Anr

.....Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Coram

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Ms. Anshal Sharma, Advocate vice Mr.

Balwant Singh Thakur, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. Rajat Chaudhary, Assistant Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

Notice. Mr. Rajat Chaudhary, learned Assistant Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.

2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matters are heard at this stage.

3. Petitioners’ grievance is that their representations, annexed with the respective writ petitions, seeking applicability of Surinder Kumar & Ors Versus State of H.P. & another.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

1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.

2 CWP No.3280 of 2022, decided alongwith connected matters on 20.09.2024

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.

4. 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 in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Surinder Kumar2 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 December 31, 2025

Judge R.Atal