Himachal Pradesh High Court
COPC/1083/2026 of ARUN KUMAR Vs GYANENDRA PRATAP SINGH on 31 August 2026
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.1083 of 2026 Date of Decision: 31.08.2026 _______________________________________________________ Arun Kumar …….Petitioner Versus Shri Gyanendra Pratap Singh … Respondent ______________________________________________________
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:36882
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
COPC No.1083 of 2026 Date of Decision: 31.08.2026 _______________________________________________________ Arun Kumar
…….Petitioner
Versus
Shri Gyanendra Pratap Singh
… Respondent ______________________________________________________
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1
For the Petitioner: Mr. Rahul, Advocate vice Mr. R.L.Chaudhary, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Bharat Bhushan, Senior Panel Counsel. _______________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral):
While placing on record copy of speaking order dated 21.04.2026, issued under the signatures of DIG(Welfare) Directorate General, CRPF, New Delhi, Mr. Bharat Bhushan, learned Senior Panel Counsel, representing the respondent, states that the mandate contained in the judgment dated 28.10.2025 passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 15240 of 2025, titled Arun Kumar vs. Union of India and others., stands duly complied with.
2. Having perused the aforesaid speaking order vis-a-vis mandate contained in the judgment alleged to have been violated, this Court finds merit in the contention of learned Senior Panel Counsel representing the respondent and as such, nothing remains to be 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2
2026:HHC:36882
adjudicated in the instant petition and accordingly same is disposed of, reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate Court of law, laying challenge to speaking order dated 21.04.2026 passed in purported compliance of the judgment alleged to have been violated. Notice issued to the respondent is hereby discharged. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(Sandeep Sharma), Judge
August 31,2026 (shankar)