Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/15153/2026 of HARMESH KAUR Vs THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS on 1 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.15153 of 2026 Date of Decision: 01.09.2026 _______________________________________________________ Harmesh Kaur …….Petitioner 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.
2026:HHC:37117 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No.15153 of 2026 Date of Decision: 01.09.2026 _______________________________________________________ Harmesh Kaur
…….Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh & others … Respondents _______________________________________________________
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1
For the Petitioner: Mr. Somesh Sharma, Advocate vice Mr.
Karun Negi, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate Generals with Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral):
Before reply, if any, could be called from the respondents, learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, fairly states that the petitioner would be content and satisfied in case the present petition is considered as a representation and the same is decided by the competent authority, in a time bound manner.
2. While putting in appearance on behalf of the respondents, Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2 2026:HHC:37117 General, fairly states that he is not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner.
3. Consequently, in view of the above, the present petition is disposed of, with a direction to the respondents to consider the present petition as representation on behalf of the petitioner and thereafter decide the same in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks. 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 appropriate order. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(Sandeep Sharma),
Judge September 01,2026 (shankar)