Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/18874/2026 on 27 October 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP Nos.18874 & 18876 of 2026
Decided on: 27.10.2026
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.18874 of 2026 Krishna Devi
…..Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. and Ors
.....Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. CWP No.18876 of 2026 Vinod Kumar
…..Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. and Ors
.....Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coram
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Raj Thakur, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
Notice. Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents in both the writ petitions.
1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.
2. Petitioners’ grievance is that their representations, annexed with the respective writ petitions, seeking applicability of Madan Lal Sharma & Anr. Versus State of H.P. & Anr.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 Deputy Advocate General is not averse to this prayer.
3. 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 in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above decision, within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners.
2 CWP No.3341 of 2019, decided on 04.09.2021
The writ petitions stand disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua October 27, 2026
Judge R.Atal