CWP/18640/2026 on 26 October 2026

1. CWP No. 18539/2026

Vidya Chauhan

…Petitioner

Versus State of H.P. & Ors.

.…Respondents

2. CWP No. 18684/2026

Kulvinder Kumar

…Petitioner

Versus

State of H.P. & Ors.

.…Respondents

3. CWP No. 18609/2026

Sanjay Kumar & Anr.

…Petitioners

Versus

State of H.P. & Ors.

.…Respondents

4. CWP No. 18674/2026

Sunil Sharma & Ors.

…Petitioners

Versus

State of H.P. & Ors.

.…Respondents

5. CWP No. 18671/2026

Ram Lal & Ors.

…Petitioners

Versus

State of H.P. & Ors.

.…Respondents

6. CWP No. 18640/2026

Vipan Kumar & Anr.

…Petitioners

Versus

State of H.P. & Anr.

.…Respondents

7. CWP No. 18641/2026

Subhash Chand & Anr.

…Petitioners

Versus

State of H.P. & Anr.

.…Respondents

8. CWP No. 18642/2026

Joginder Singh & Ors.

…Petitioners

Versus

State of H.P. & Ors.

.…Respondents

9. CWP No. 18643/2026

Jia Lal & Anr.

…Petitioners

Versus

State of H.P. & Ors.

.…Respondents

10. CWP No. 18631/2026

Isha Sharma

…Petitioner

Versus

State of H.P. & Ors.

.…Respondents

11. CWP No. 18606/2026

Kamini Gupta & Anr.

…Petitioners

Versus

State of H.P. & Ors.

.…Respondents

12. CWP No. 18681/2026

Vineet Kumar

…Petitioner

Versus

State of H.P. & Ors.

.…Respondents

13. CWP No. 18550/2026

Archna

…Petitioner

Versus

State of H.P. & Ors.

.…Respondents

14. CWP No. 18554/2026

Sarita

…Petitioner

Versus

State of H.P. & Ors.

.…Respondents

15. CWP No. 18542/2026

Anupama Devi & Ors.

…Petitioners

Versus

State of H.P. & Anr.

.…Respondents

16. CWP No. 18545/2026

Sukhbir Kaur

…Petitioner

Versus

State of H.P. & Ors.

.…Respondents …………………………………………………………………………….

Coram

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: M/s Hemant Kumar Thakur, Naveen K, Negi, Gambhir Singh Chauhan, Mamta Garg, Ravneet Kumar, Ajeet Singh Saklani, Vivek Thakur, Vaibhav Tanwar, Advocates, for the petitioners in the respective petitions.

For the respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma Additional, Advocate General in all

Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes

the petitions.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J

Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents in all the petitions.

2. Petitioners’ grievance is that their respective representation(s) annexed with these writ petitions, seeking applicability of Inder Singh Thakur & Ors. 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, respondents/competent authority are directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners, in accordance with law, within a time bound manner. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection to this prayer.

Having regard to the above submissions, but without examining the merits of the matters, these writ petitions are disposed of by directing 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 judgment, within a period of six weeks from today. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioners.

2 CWP No.4830 of 2023, decided alongwith connected matter on 07.04.2025

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Judge 26th October, 2026(rohit)