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 · 217 wordsJyotsna Rewal Dua, J
Notice. Mr. L.N.Sharma, 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.
Petitioner’s grievance is that his representation dated 12.09.2025 (Annexure P-9) seeking applicability of State of H.P and others versus Om Prakash2 has not been decided till date by the respondents/competent authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner 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 directi n to the respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitionerl dated 12.09.2025 (Annexure P-9) in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the ab ve judgment in the case of Om Parkash2 within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner.
The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.