IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. C. Review No. 4 of 2011 & connected matters. Decided on: December 3, 2011. 1. Civil Review No. 4 of 2011 State of H.P. & anr. Vrs. Joginder Singh. 2. Civil Review No. 7 of 2011 State of H.P. & anr. Vrs. Dharam Pal. 3. Civil Review No. 9 of 2011 State of H.P. & anr. Vrs. Raj Kumar. 4. Civil Review No. 11 of 2011 State of H.P. & anr. Vrs. Nagender Prakash. 5. Civil Review No. 13 of 2011 State of H.P. & anr. Vrs. Balbir Singh. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. For the petitioners: Mr. R.K. Bawa, AG with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. AG. For the Respondents: Mr. Neel Kamal Sood, Advocate, ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) CMP(M) No. 50 of 2011 in C. Rev. No.4 of 2011 CMP(M) No. 54 of 2011 in C. Rev. No. 7 of 2011 CMP(M) No. 56 of 2011 in C. Rev. No. 9 of 2011 CMP(M) No. 59 of 2011 in C. Rev. No. 11 of 2011 CMP(M) No. 61 of 2011 in C. Rev. No. 13 of 2011 Heard. The delay in filing the review petitions is allowed and the applications are disposed of. C. Review Nos. 4,7,9,11 and 13 of 2011. The State has come up in review(s) seeking review of the judgment(s) passed by this Court. The matter pertains to the reengagement of Home-Guards. It appears that the Government had already taken a stand for re-employment of the writ petitioners as can be seen from the order(s) sought to be implemented. But the stand taken in the review petition(s) is that there is no provision for reengagement and those orders are to be reconsidered. In case any order(s) passed in favour of the writ 2 petitioners are to be reconsidered, it is certainly open to them to do so in accordance with law, with notice to the writ petitioners. Therefore, these review petitions are disposed of making it clear that in case the Government wants to reconsider their stand, it will be open to them to do so with notice to the writ petitioners and the judgments shall not stand in the way of the matter being reconsidered in accordance with law. However, it is made clear that in case such a step is taken for re-consideration, the submission that it is in the better interest of the Government to have the trained person should also be considered. 2. With the above observations, the review petitions are disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. Authenticated copy. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. December 3, 2011. ( Justice Rajiv Sharma), (vs/hl) Judge.