IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP No. 16155 of 2026. Decided on :17 th September , 2026 Vijay Kumar & 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. Bhupinder Thakur and Ms. Ranjana Shrma, Advocates. For the respondents: Ms. Seema Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for respondents No. 1 to 4. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Notice. Ms. Seema Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents/State. 2. Petitioners’ grievance is that their representation (Annexure P-5 Colly), seeking applicability of Dinesh Kumar & Ors Vs. State of H.P. & Ors.2 has not been decided till date by the respondents/competent authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioners would be content in case the respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to consider and decide the aforesaid 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2CWP No. 1747 of 2023, decided on 09.10.2023 2 representation in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Assistant Advocate General is not averse to this prayer.

3. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation 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 decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 17th September, 2026. (jai)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP No. 16155 of 2026. Decided on :17 th September , 2026 Vijay Kumar & 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. Bhupinder Thakur and Ms. Ranjana Shrma, Advocates. For the respondents: Ms. Seema Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for respondents No. 1 to 4. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Notice. Ms. Seema Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents/State. 2. Petitioners’ grievance is that their representation (Annexure P-5 Colly), seeking applicability of Dinesh Kumar & Ors Vs. State of H.P. & Ors.2 has not been decided till date by the respondents/competent authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioners would be content in case the respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to consider and decide the aforesaid 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2CWP No. 1747 of 2023, decided on 09.10.2023 2 representation in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Assistant Advocate General is not averse to this prayer.

3. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation 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 decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 17th September, 2026. (jai)