IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 14925/2026 Decided on: 01.09.2026 Kaul Ram & Ors. …Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents. ……………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners: Mr. Diwan Singh Negi, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J. Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. Petitioner’s grievance is that their respective representation at Annexure P-2 (Colly), seeking applicability Inder Singh Thakur & Ors. Vs. State of H.P. & Ors.2 have not been decided till date by the respondents/competent authority. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners would be content, in case, respondents/competent authority are directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners, 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2CWP No. 4830 of 2023, decided on 07.04.2025 2

in accordance with law, within a time bound manner. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection to this prayer. Having regard to the above submissions, but without examining the merits of the matters, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners, in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment, within a period of six weeks from today. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioners. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 1st September, 2026(rohit)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 14925/2026 Decided on: 01.09.2026 Kaul Ram & Ors. …Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents. ……………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners: Mr. Diwan Singh Negi, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J. Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. Petitioner’s grievance is that their respective representation at Annexure P-2 (Colly), seeking applicability Inder Singh Thakur & Ors. Vs. State of H.P. & Ors.2 have not been decided till date by the respondents/competent authority. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners would be content, in case, respondents/competent authority are directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners, 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2CWP No. 4830 of 2023, decided on 07.04.2025 2

in accordance with law, within a time bound manner. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection to this prayer. Having regard to the above submissions, but without examining the merits of the matters, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners, in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment, within a period of six weeks from today. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioners. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 1st September, 2026(rohit)