Seema vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Ors

Sandeep Sharma, J

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that his client would be content and satisfied in case prayer made in the instant petition is considered and decided by the competent authority in terms of judgment dated 19.4.2023, passed in CWP No.3841 of 2022, Dr. Umesh Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Anr. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to the aforesaid innocuous prayer made by the petitioner.

Having perused aforesaid judgment sought to be relied upon vis-à-vis issue raised in the petition at hand, this Court finds that issue raised in the instant petition already stands adjudicated in the aforesaid judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Court and as such, no prejudice would be caused to either of the parties in case respondents are directed to consider and decide case of the petitioner in light of the aforesaid judgment.

Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider and decide case of the petitioner in light of Dr. Umesh Kumar case (supra), expeditiously, preferably, within four weeks. In case, petitioner is found to be similarly situate to the petitioner in the aforesaid judgment, she would be extended similar benefits. Needless to say, authority concerned while doing the needful in terms of the instant order shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass detailed speaking order thereupon. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings before appropriate court of law, if she still remains aggrieved. All pending applications stand disposed of.

List for compliance on 16.11.2023.