IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.4193 of 2019 Date of Decision: 11.09.2026 _______________________________________________________ Sh. Rajesh Bhatt …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Ruchika Negi, Advocate vice Ms. Suchitra Sen, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate Generals with Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Learned counsel representing the petitioner states that the petitioner is not coming forward to impart instructions and as such, this Court may pass appropriate orders. 2. Having taken note of aforesaid submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court has reason to believe and presume that petitioner is no more interested in prosecuting the case and as such, same is dismissed for want of prosecution. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge September 11, 2026 (shankar) 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?