Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 23231 (HP)

NEELAM KUMARI v. THE STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER

CWP/14114/2024 · 2025-01-10

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.14114 of 2024 and connected matters. Decided on: 10th January, 2025 _________________________________________________________________ 1. CWP No. 14114 of 2024 Neelam Kumari …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr …..Respondents. ______________________________________________________ 2. CWP No. 14116 of 2024 Anjana Thakur …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr …..Respondents. ______________________________________________________ 3. CWP No. 14118 of 2024 Tripta Devi …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr …..Respondents ______________________________________________________ 4. CWP No. 14120 of 2024 Bhavanindu Kumari …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr …..Respondents ______________________________________________________ - 2 - Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioners: Mr. Dheeraj K.Verma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Y.P.S.Dhaulta and Mr. L.N.Sharma, Additional Advocates General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. L.N.Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents in all the writ petitions. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the legal issue involved in the cases have already been adjudicated upon; Petitioners have filed representations, annexed with the respective writ petitions as Annexures P-9, for the redressal of their grievances raised in the respective writ petitions, but till date the same have not been adjudicated upon; Petitioners would be satisfied in case competent authority is directed to decide the representations in accordance with law within a time bound schedule. The above is not objected to by learned Additional 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes - 3 - Advocate General. 3. In view of the above, these writ petitions are disposed of by directing the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from today. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioners. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge January 10, 2025 R.Atal