Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/20856/2025 of HARENDER KUMAR Vs THE STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER on 31 December 2025
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.20838 of 2025 alongwith CWP No.20856 of 2025 Decided on: 31st December, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. CWP No.20838 of 2025 Manoj Kumar …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No.20838 of 2025 alongwith
CWP No.20856 of 2025
Decided on: 31st December, 2025
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
1. CWP No.20838 of 2025 Manoj Kumar
…..Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. and another
.....Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. CWP No.20856 of 2025 Harender Kumar
…..Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. and another
.....Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coram
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Amit Kumar Dhumal, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Rajat Choudhry, Assistant Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
Notice. Mr. Rajat Choudhry, learned Assistant Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.
1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.
2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matters are heard at this stage.
3. Petitioners’ grievance is that their representations (Annexure P-3) seeking applicability of Mohit Sharma & Anr. Versus State of H.P. & Ors.2 have not been decided till date by the respondents/competent authority. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners would be content in case the respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representations in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Assistant Advocate General is not averse to this prayer.
4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matters, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners (Annexure P-3) 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 petitioners.
2 CWP No.1638 of 2024, decided on 29.11.2024
The writ petitions stand disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua December 31, 2025
Judge Mukesh