Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/14202/2026 of M/S MAA SHARDA MECIAL CENTER Vs THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS on 8 October 2026
COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.14202 of 2026 Date of Decision: 08.10.2026 _______________________________________________________ M/s Maa Sharda Medical Centre …….Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others … Respondents
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No.14202 of 2026 Date of Decision: 08.10.2026 _______________________________________________________ M/s Maa Sharda Medical Centre
…….Petitioners
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh & others … Respondents _______________________________________________________
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1
For the Petitioner: Mr. Varun Thakur & Mr. Aakash Thakur,
Advocates.
For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan and Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocate Generals. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral):
Learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, states that present petition may be disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the present petition as representation on behalf of the petitioner and decide the same in a time-bound manner. Learned Additional Advocate General contends that though he has no objection to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner, but relief otherwise prayed for in instant petition can only be granted if shortcomings pointed out by the Joint Inspection Committee are removed.
1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2
2. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of same with a direction to the respondents to treat the present petition as representation on behalf of the petitioner and decide the same in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks. Needles to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass speaking order. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(Sandeep Sharma),
Judge October 08,2026 (shankar)