Shanti Devi Vs the State of Hp and Others — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Shanti Devi Vs the State of Hp and Others — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondent No.4/competent authority to consider and decide the petitioner's representation dated 13.10.2025 in accordance with law, keeping in view the facts of the case, within four weeks, and to communicate the order so passed to the petitioner; pending miscellaneous application(s) stand disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents/competent authority should be directed to consider and decide the petitioner's representation dated 13.10.2025 (Annexure P-6) seeking pension/family pension after the death of her husband, in view of the judgment in CWP No. 2269/2024 (Mahesh Ram Vs. State of H.P. & Ors.).

Court's answer

Without examining the merits of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent No.4/competent authority to consider and decide the petitioner's representation in accordance with law, keeping in view the facts of the case, within a period of four weeks.

Ratio / Principle

The order so passed is to be communicated to the petitioner, and pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (CWP No. 19030/2025) filed by Shanti Devi seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the respondent authorities to decide her representation dated 13.10.2025 (Annexure P-6) claiming pension/family pension after the death of her husband, in view of the judgment in CWP No. 2269/2024, Mahesh Ram Vs. State of H.P. & Ors. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated she would be content if the representations (including the late husband's representation dated 15.02.2017, Annexure P-3) were considered and decided in accordance with law within a time-bound manner; counsel for the respondents were not averse. Without examining the merits, the High Court disposed of the petition directing respondent No.4/competent authority to consider and decide the representation in accordance with law within four weeks and to communicate the order to the petitioner; pending miscellaneous applications stood disposed of.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No. 19030/2025 Decided on: 04.12.2025

Shanti Devi …Petitioner

Versus

State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents.

Coram

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?¹

For the petitioner: Mr. Vijay Bir Singh, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for respondent No.1.

Mr. Tek Ram Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2.

Mr. Shekhar Badola, Advocate vice Mr. Rahul Thakur, Advocate for respondent No.3 & 4.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J

Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate

General, Mr. Tek Ram Sharma and Mr. Shekhar Badola, learned counsel, accept notice on behalf of respondents No.1, 2 and 3 & 4, respectively.

This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following

substantive relief: -

“Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to decide the representation dated 13.10.2025 as Annexure P-6, in view of the judgment passed by Hon’ble High Court in CWP No.

1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes

2

2269/2024, titled as Mahesh Ram Vs. State of H.P. & Ors. and further directing the respondents to release the pensionary benefit to the petitioner after the death of her husband.”

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has preferred a representation on 13.10.2025 (Annexure P- 6) seeking pension/family pension after the death of her husband in light of the facts already brought to the notice of the respondents by her late husband Sh. Jeet Ram Thakur in his representation dated 15.02.2017 (Annexure P-3). Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner would be content, in case, respondents/competent authority are directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioner, in accordance with law, within a time bound manner. Learned counsel for the respondents are not averse to this prayer.

Having regard to the above submissions , but without examining the merits of the matter, the instant writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent No.4/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner, in accordance with law and keeping in view the facts of the case, within a period of four weeks from today. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioner. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge

4^th December, 2025(rohit)