Himachal Pradesh High Court

CMP.M/1823/2026 on 6 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

CMP(M) No. 1823

of 2026

Decided on:

06.11

.2026

State of Himachal Pradesh and others …….applicants/petitioners Versus Sharda … non-applicant/respondent

Coram

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 _____________________________________________________ For the petitioners : Mr. Anup Rattan, ADvocate General with Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional Advocate General. For the respondents : Notice not issued. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) CMP(M) No. 1823 of 2026 For the reasons assigned in the application, the same is allowed and delay in filing the review petition is condoned. Review Petition No.

of 2026

Be registered. By way of this review petition, the State is seeking review of judgment dated 23.03.2026, passed by this Court in CWP No. 2939 of 2024, titled as Smt. Sharda vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others.

3. Having heard learned Advocate General and having perused the averments made in the review petition as also the judgment, review of which is being sought, this Court is of the 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

High Court of H.P. ::: Downloaded on - 07/11/2026 02:57:50 :::CIS

considered view that no ground is made for review of the judgment in issue. In fact, in para-5 of the judgment, this Court has categorically quoted para-25 of the stand of the State taken in the reply filed to the writ petition, in which, the stand of the State was that the case of the petitioner was indeed covered by the judgment passed in Sant Ram’s case, but as per the State, at the relevant time, State had assailed said judgment passed in Sant Ram’s case, which was pending before Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. Though, learned Advocate General submitted that this was an incorrect made in the reply, however, the record as it existed, contained this averment. Therefore, as there is no error, much less apparent, on the face of the record, the review petition is accordingly dismissed. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. CMP No. 29513 of 2026 In view of order passed in the review petition, no order is required to be passed on this application and the same is accordingly dismissed.

(Ajay Mohan Goel)

Judge November 06

, 2026

(narender) High Court of H.P. ::: Downloaded on - 07/11/2026 02:57:50 :::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