HEERA SINGH Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Before notice, if any, could be issued to the respondents, learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, states that his client would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to respondents to consider and decide the pending representation (Annexure P-4) of the petitioner in light of judgment dtd. 23/6/2025, passed by this Court in CWP No.8032 of 2021, titled as Vikas Kumar Vs. Sate of H.P. and Others, along with connected matters, in a time bound manner.

(2.) Learned Additional Advocate General fairly states that he is not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner.

(3.) Having perused the averments contained in the petition as well as relief prayed therein vis-a-vis judgment sought to be relied upon, this Court finds that the issue raised in the instant petition already stands adjudicated by this Court and as such, no prejudice would be caused to either of the parties, if the respondents are directed to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of judgment supra.