IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP (T) No. 7047 of 2008 with CWP (T) Nos. 7048 and 7080 of 2008 Date of decision: 6.10.2010 1. CWP (T) No. 7047 of 2008 Satya Pal Sharma and ors. versus State of H.P. and anr. 2. CWP (T) No. 7048 of 2008 Sushil Kumar versus State of H.P. and anr. 3. CWP (T) No. 7080 of 2008 Naresh Kumar Kapila versus State of H.P. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. Whether approved for reporting ?1 No For the Petitioner (s) : Mrs. Ranjana Parmar, Advocate (in CWP (T) Nos. 7047 and 7048 of 2008) Mr. Puneet Rajta vice Mr. K.D. Shreedhar, Advocate (in CWP (T) No. 7080 of 2008) For the Respondents : Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. with Mr. Rajesh Mandhotra, Dy. A.G. Sanjay Karol, Judge (oral): According to the learned counsel for the parties, the matter in issue is squarely covered by the decision rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 1358 of 2008 (wrongly mentioned as CWP No. 1538 of 2008), titled S.S. Kutlehria and others versus State of H.P. and others, 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the Judgment ? 2 copy of which is taken on record. They further state that this order/judgment stands clarified and the directions issued therein also squarely apply to the instant cases. 2. They submit that facts are same and similar. It is therefore, prayed that similar directions be issued in the instant cases. 3. In view of the aforesaid, it is directed that the directions in S.S. Kutlehria (supra), with clarifications, if any, shall mutatis mutandis apply to the instant cases also. Consequently action be taken within three months from the date of receipt of copy of order. ( Sanjay Karol ), October 6, 2010. Judge. (GR)