AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 234 wordsJyotsna Rewal Dua, J
Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage.
Petitioners’ grievance is that their representation dated 01.11.2025 (Annexure P-5) seeking applicability of Madan Lal Sharma Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another[CWP No.3341 of 2019, decided on 04.09.2021] has 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 representation in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer
Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the pe i ioners dated 01.11.2025 (Annexure P-5) in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Madan Lal Sharma [CWP No.3341 of 2019, decided on 04.09.2021] within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners.
The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.