JUDGMENT : (Vivek Singh Thakur, J.) The appellants, by filing present appeal, have assailed judgment dated 11 th December, 2024, passed in CWP No. 6846 of 2024 titled Sonia Chauhan and others vs. State of HP and others, whereby prayer of the appellants seeking direction to respondents to allot the medical shops to appellants as per Award Letter dated 14 th October, 2022 in Indira Gandhi Medical College and Hospital (IGMC), Shimla has been rejected. 2 Brief facts of the case are that on 13 th August, 2022, Expression of Interest was invited by the Rogi Kalyan Samiti, Indira Gandhi Medical College and Hospital at Shimla (RKS) from experienced pharmacists, duly registered with Pharmacy Council of Himachal Pradesh, for empanelment as Phamacists to run RKS Medical Shops at IGMC Shimla in the identified place in new OPD Block. 3 By completing the process, on 14 th October, 2022, appellants were empaneled to run RKS Medical Shops and they were directed to report to the Senior Medical Superintendent-cum-Member Secretary RKS IGMC for verification of original documents and to execute the agreement on stamp paper of Rs.50/- within 7 days. 4 Thereafter, according to appellants, despite approaching the concerned Authorities by them, verification of documents and execution of agreement was not completed and ultimately, on 6 th July, 2024 fresh Expression of Interest was invited by Rogi Kalyan Samiti (RKS) for running the same shops for which Expression of Interest was invited on 13 th August, 2022 and for which appellants were empaneled on completion of process. 5 With aforesaid facts, appellants approached the Court by filing CWP No. 6846 of 2024 stating therein that inviting of 2 nd Expression of Interest for the same shop(s) was arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. According to appellants, after issuance of the Award Letter to them, their allotment of medical shops was kept in abeyance despite making representation by the appellants and sending electronic mails to the Office of Principal-cum-Chairman of Rogi Kalyan Samiti IGMC Shimla which resulted in unexpected delay in occupancy and operation of shops allotted to them. According to appellants, after issuance of the Award Letter to them, their allotment of medical shops was kept in abeyance despite making representation by the appellants and sending electronic mails to the Office of Principal-cum-Chairman of Rogi Kalyan Samiti IGMC Shimla which resulted in unexpected delay in occupancy and operation of shops allotted to them. 6 To substantiate the plea, appellants have placed on record representations dated 14 th September, 2023 submitted by appellant Sonia Chauhan, dated 18 th September, 2023 submitted by the appellant Kartik Sharma, dated 21.09.2023 submitted by the appellant Amit Kumar Sharma; and print out of screen shots of Whatsapp messages dated 7.10.2023 and 10.11.2023 sent to the Principal, IGMC Shimla. 7 According to respondents, appellants did not report for documents verification and execution of agreement within stipulated time period i.e. 7 days. However, thereafter time was extended for further 20 days vide communication dated 21.10.2022 but appellants did not report the respondents till last date of extended time i.e. 4 th November, 2022 and, therefore, neither documents verification could be done nor agreement could be executed with appellants. 8 It is also case of respondents that provisional empanlement of 5 pharmacists was done against the identified space as shops were not constructed at that time, which were to be established after execution of agreement. 9 Further case of respondents is that in aforesaid facts and circumstances matter was placed before the Executive Committee of RKS in the meeting held on 17 th June, 2023 wherein after detailed deliberation and considering the fact that contract agreement had not been executed with the empaneled pharmacists, case was decided to be sent to the Government for necessary decision. 10 Thereafter, the aforesaid decision of the Executive Committee was placed before the Governing Body of RKS IGMC in meeting held on 8 th December, 2023 in which decision of Executive Committee was confirmed and matter was sent to the Government for necessary action on 15.06.2024. The Government accorded approval to call Expression of Interest to run the RKS medical shops and accordingly, Expression of Interest was called on 6 th July, 2024 through proper publication in the newspaper as well as in the advertisement through official website of the IGMC Shimla. The Government accorded approval to call Expression of Interest to run the RKS medical shops and accordingly, Expression of Interest was called on 6 th July, 2024 through proper publication in the newspaper as well as in the advertisement through official website of the IGMC Shimla. 11 In aforesaid facts, it has been contended that fresh process had been completed and eligible persons have been empaneled for allotment of shops and thus plea of appellants has been opposed. 12 To substantiate the claim of RKS/respondents, communication dated 21.10.2022 extending the time for further 20 days for original documents verification and execution of agreement, minutes of meeting of 17.06.2023, 8.12.2023 and photocopies of noting sheets depicting the decision of Government to notify Expression of Interest have been placed on record. 13 Learned counsel for appellants has submitted that appellants were continuously approaching the respondents but documents verification and execution of agreement was not permitted on the ground that on 14 th October, 2022, for declaration of General Elections of Himachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly, Code of Conduct came in force, and communication dated 21 st October, 2022 was neither issued nor served to or received by appellants and this document has been fabricated to repel the claim of appellants illegally. It has been further contended that when nothing was done then appellants were constrained to submit their in-writing representation and Whatsapp messages but despite that nothing was done and ultimately, fresh Expression of Interest was called without cancelling the previous process. 14 During present appeal, an application CMP No. 2820 of 2025 has been filed by one Vikas Thapar claiming that he is empaneled pharmacist to run the RKS medical shop in process completed under fresh Expression of Interest. Fresh process has been completed under fresh Expression of Interest dated 6 th July, 2024 but shop is not being allotted to him because of the interim stay operating in the present appeal. The said Vikas Thapar has also filed another application CMP No. 2825 of 2025 for modification in the interim order dated 27 th December, 2024. Fresh process has been completed under fresh Expression of Interest dated 6 th July, 2024 but shop is not being allotted to him because of the interim stay operating in the present appeal. The said Vikas Thapar has also filed another application CMP No. 2825 of 2025 for modification in the interim order dated 27 th December, 2024. 15 It has been argued by learned counsel for appellants that decision to invite fresh Expression of Interest does not contain any reason and the same has been invited without cancelling the process completed under previous Expression of Interest and therefore, on this count only, the fresh Expression of Interest and proceedings completed in furtherance thereto, are liable to be quashed. 16 Plea of deferring the verification of documents and execution of agreement on account of enforcement of Code of Conduct has been pleaded first time in the reply to aforesaid applications. Neither in petition nor in appeal, this plea was ever raised. Faced with aforesaid situation, learned counsel for the appellant replied that he had raised this issue earlier and today also orally. 17 Execution of agreement was to be done on stamp paper of Rs.50/-. Appellants have not disclosed as to on which date they approached the concerned Authority for verification of documents and execution of agreement along with stamp paper of Rs.50/-. The production of stamp paper, if any purchased by appellants for execution of agreement, was necessary in present petition as it was a vital document to substantiate the plea of appellants that they had approached the respondents Authorities for documents verification and execution of agreement. 18 Along with reply, to substantiate the plea, the documents were placed on record including the communication dated 21 st October, 2024. Neither any rejoinder was filed by appellants to rebut the plea taken in reply nor any other material has been placed on record to rebut the plea taken in reply as well as documents filed therewith. 19 Plea not taken in petition, and not even in LPA, being argued by learned counsel for appellants, is neither sustainable nor can be accepted. 20 Though it is claim of the appellants that they were repeatedly approaching the respondent authority but on record there is nothing to reflect that they, prior to September, 2023, ever approached the respondents authority. 19 Plea not taken in petition, and not even in LPA, being argued by learned counsel for appellants, is neither sustainable nor can be accepted. 20 Though it is claim of the appellants that they were repeatedly approaching the respondent authority but on record there is nothing to reflect that they, prior to September, 2023, ever approached the respondents authority. There is neither pleading nor any explanation regarding the fact that appellants, even after the currency period of Code of Conduct, had ever approached the respondents and there was inaction on the part of respondents and they had not approached the competent authority in writing or the Court. It is apparent from the record that if it is considered that appellants approached the respondent authority on 14 th September, 2023, whereas the Executive Committee, prior to representation, had already decided to refer the matter to the Government for necessary decision. Therefore, it was too late to approach the respondents in September, 2023 by fling in-writing representation or sending the Whatsapp messages. 21 In the given facts and circumstances of the case, it is apparent that matter was decided to be submitted to the Government for decision afresh for non-verification of documents and non-execution of agreement by empaneled pharmacists during the period of 7 days and even further extended period of 20 days. On expiry of time period, the right of empaneled pharmacists ceased to exist. This Court is constrained to draw inference that appellants failed to report to concerned authority for verification of documents and execution of agreement as they remained silent till September, 2023 and thereafter, also again till publication of fresh Expression of Interest. Therefore, the plea on this count raised on behalf of appellants is devoid of merit. 22 In aforesaid facts and circumstances, we do not find any ground for illegality, irregularity or perversity in the impugned judgment for calling interference therein. Judgment passed by learned Single Judge along with observations made in para 6 thereof is upheld. 23 As we are dismissing the appeal, therefore, we do not consider it necessary to pass a separate order in applications, on merit, filed by Mr. Vikas Thapar as after dismissal of appeal, he shall have no cause to become a party and contest the matter. Appeal is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous application(s) are also disposed of in same terms.