Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/20820/2025 of KAMAL KISHORE Vs THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS on 31 December 2025
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.20820 of 2025 Decided on: 31st December, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Kamal Kishore …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and 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.20820 of 2025
Decided on: 31st December, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Kamal Kishore
…..Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. and others
.....Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coram
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Yogita Sharma, Advocate vice
Ms. Mamta Garg, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.
2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage.
3. Petitioner’s grievance is that his representation (Annexure P-4) seeking applicability of Mohit Sharma & Anr. Versus State of H.P. & Ors.2 has not been decided till date by the respondents/competent authority. Learned
1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.
2 CWP No.1638 of 2024, decided on 29.11.2024
2 counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be content in case the respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representation in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer.
4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner (Annexure P-4) in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Mohit Sharma2 within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner.
The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua December 31, 2025
Judge Mukesh