Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/17885/2026 of MASTER AARUSH Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER on 7 October 2026
COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.17885 of 2026 Date of Decision: 07.10.2026 _______________________________________________________ Master Aarush …….Petitioner Versus Union of India & another … 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.17885 of 2026 Date of Decision: 07.10.2026 _______________________________________________________ Master Aarush
…….Petitioner
Versus
Union of India & another
… Respondents _______________________________________________________
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1
For the Petitioner: Mr. Shaurya Nagpal, Advocate (through
video conferencing).
For the Respondents: Mr. Balram Sharma, Deputy Solicitor General of India with Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral):
Learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, states that the petitioner would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, to decide the representation dated 27.07.2026 (Annexure P-5) in a time-bound manner.
2. While putting in appearance on behalf of the respondents, Mr. Balram Sharma, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, fairly states that representation, if not already decided, shall be decided expeditiously in accordance with law.
1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2
3. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the same with a direction to respondent No. 2 to decide the pending representation dated 27.07.2026 (Annexure P-5) expeditiously, preferably within a period of two weeks. Ordered accordingly. Needless 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 a speaking order. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(Sandeep Sharma),
Judge October 07,2026 (shankar)