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 · 229 wordsJyotsna Rewal Dua, J
Notice. Mr. Rajat Choudhry, learned Assistant 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 02.11.2025 (Annexure P-4) seeking applicability of Yashwant Kumar Vs. State of H.P. and Ors.2 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 Assistant 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 petitioner dated 02.11.2025 (Annexure P-4) in accordance with law as well as taking into considerati n the above judgment in the case of Yashwant Kumar[CWP No.8148 of 2022, decided alongwith connected matters on 21.03.2024] within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to t e petitioner.
The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.