Himachal Pradesh High Court
COPC/1093/2026 of SUDARSHANA Vs RAKESH KANWAR AND ANOTHER on 31 August 2026
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.1093 of 2026 Date of Decision: 31.08.2026 _______________________________________________________ Sudarshana …….Petitioner Versus Rakesh Kanwar & 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.
2026:HHC:36881
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
COPC No.1093 of 2026 Date of Decision: 31.08.2026 _______________________________________________________ Sudarshana
…….Petitioner
Versus
Rakesh Kanwar & another
… Respondents ______________________________________________________
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1
For the Petitioner: Mr. Naresh Kaul, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate Generals with Mr. Ravi Chauhan and Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocate Generals. _______________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral):
While placing on record communication dated 17.08.2026 issued under the signature of Director School Education, enclosing therewith copy of order dated 17.08.2026, Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General states that in terms of judgment dated 12.12.2025 passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 19528 of 2025, titled Sudarshana vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, the case of the petitioner has been decided in light of judgment dated 07.04.2025 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 4830 of 2023, titled Inder Singh Thakur & Ors. v. State of Himachal Pradesh and others and as such, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the instant proceedings.
2. Having carefully perused the aforesaid documents, which are taken on record, this Court finds merit in the contention of learned Additional Advocate General and as such, nothing remains to be 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2
2026:HHC:36881
adjudicated in the instant petitioner and accordingly, same is disposed of, with a direction to the respondents to ensure that consequential benefits, if any, arising out of the aforesaid compliance, if not already released, shall be released to the petitioner within three months. Notices issued to the respondents are hereby discharged.
(Sandeep Sharma), Judge
August 31,2026 (shankar)