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
4 paragraphs · 269 wordsSatyen Vaidya, J
Notice. Mr. Dalip K. Sharma, Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the case of the petitioners is squarely covered by the judgments passed by this Court in CWP No. 3341 of 2019, titled as Madan Lal vs. State of H.P. & Ors and CWPOA No. 6582 of 2019, titled as Prem Sukh vs. State of H.P. & Ors. He further submits that petitioners shall be content in case the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioners in a time bound manner in the light of judgments ibid.
Prayer being innocuous is not opposed. Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed of without making any comments on the merits of the case of the petitioners. It is directed that respondents shall consider the case of the petitioners in light of judgment passed by this Court in CWP No. 3341 of 2019, titled as Madan Lal vs. State of H.P. & Ors and CWPOA No. 6582 of 2019, titled as Prem Sukh vs. State of H.P. & Ors., within eight weeks from today and will decide the same by passing a speaking order. In case petitioners are found similarly situated as petitioners in . CWP No. 3341 of 2019, titled as Madan Lal vs. State of H.P. & Ors and CWPOA No. 6582 of 2019, titled as Prem Sukh vs. State of H.P. & Ors.,they will also be granted the same benefits as granted to petitioner in above referred case. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.