SANJEEV KUMAR AND OTHERS v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS
CWP/20946/2025 · 2026-01-01
Jyotsna Rewal Dua
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 1929 (HP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 1929 (HP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No.20946 of 2025 alongwith
CWP No.20948 of 2025
Decided on: 1st January, 2026 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. CWP No.20946 of 2025 Sanjeev Kumar and others
…..Petitioners
Versus
State of H.P. and others
.....Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. CWP No.20948 of 2025 Santosh Kumar and others
…..Petitioners
Versus
State of H.P. and others
.....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Rajat Kumar, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.
1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.
2
2.
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matters are heard at this stage.
3.
Petitioners’ grievance is that their representations dated 09.11.2025 (Annexure P-3 Colly.) seeking applicability of Yashwant Kumar Vs. State of H.P. and 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 the respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representations in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer.
4.
Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matters, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners dated 09.11.2025 (Annexure P-3 Colly.) in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Yashwant Kumar2 within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners.
2 CWP No.8148 of 2022, decided alongwith connected matters on 21.03.2024
3
The writ petitions stand disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua January 01, 2026
Judge Mukesh