BHIMA NAND Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.

(2.) With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage.

(3.) Petitioners' grievance is that their representation dtd. 1/11/2025 (Annexure P-5) seeking applicability of Madan Lal Sharma Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another[CWP No.3341 of 2019, decided on 4/9/2021] has not been decided till date by the respondents/competent authority. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners 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 Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer