Himachal Pradesh High Court

CWP/19692/2026 on 3 November 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.19692 of 2026

Decided on: 3rd November, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bachittar Singh

…..Petitioner

Versus

State of H.P. and others

.....Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Coram

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Ashok Kumar 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.

2. Petitioner’s grievance is that his representation (Annexure P-3 Colly.) seeking applicability of Sunder Singh Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.2 and Balo Devi & others Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others3 has not been decided till date by the respondents/competent authority. Learned counsel for the

1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 Civil Appeal No.6309 of 2017, decided on 08.03.2018 3 Civil Appeal No.4792 of 2022, decided on 18.07.2022 High Court of H.P. ::: Downloaded on - 05/11/2026 03:16:40 :::CIS

2 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 Deputy Advocate General is not averse to this prayer.

3. 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-3) in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgments 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 November 03, 2026

Judge Mukesh

High Court of H.P. ::: Downloaded on - 05/11/2026 03:16:40 :::CIS

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead