Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/19832/2026 on 3 November 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
CWP No.19832 of 2026
Decided on: 03.11.2026 _________________________________________________________________ Sanjeev Kumar
....Petitioner
Versus State of H.P. & Ors.
…Respondents _________________________________________________________________
Coram
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua
1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Gaurav Sharma and Mr. Vaibhav Tanwar, Advocates
For the respondents: Mr. Sikandar Bhushan, Deputy Advocate General for respondents No. 1 and .2.
Mr. Vishwajeet Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.3.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
Notice. Mr. Sikandar Bhushan, learned Deputy Advocate General and Mr. Vishwajeet Singh, accept service of notice on behalf of the respective respondents.
2. Petitioner feels aggrieved against office letters dated 23.09.2026 (Annexure P-4) and 05.10.2026 (Annexure P-5) conveying that petitioner’s engagement/appointment is
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes High Court of H.P. ::: Downloaded on - 04/11/2026 03:01:29 :::CIS
liable to be cancelled as he did not fulfill upper age limit criteria in terms of the advertisement dated 16.04.2026 (Annexure P-1) wherein the minimum and maximum age limit for all categories was prescribed as 18 and 45 years, respectively, to be reckoned as on 01.01.2026. Petitioner though got selected and appointed under the said advertisement as Teacher (Sociology) in the respondent- Education Department, but after about a month of his having rendered service, it transpired that his age was 45 years, 7 months, and 1 day as on 01.01.2026. This factual position is admitted to be correct by learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Judge November 3, 2026 R.Atal
High Court of H.P. ::: Downloaded on - 04/11/2026 03:01:29 :::CIS