Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 25368 (HP)

ANIL KUMAR v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/14676/2025 · 2025-09-11

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.14670 of 2025 alongwith CWP No.14676 of 2025 Decided on: 11th September, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. CWP No.14670 of 2025 Anil Kumar …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. CWP No.14676 of 2025 Anil Kumar …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Reham Tullah, Advocate vice Mr. Raj Thakur, 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 07.07.2025 (Annexure P-1) seeking applicability of Madan Lal Sharma Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another2 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 07.07.2025 (Annexure P-1) in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Madan Lal Sharma2 within a period of six weeks from 2 CWP No.3341 of 2019, decided on 04.09.2021 3 today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners. The writ petitions stand disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua September 11, 2025 Judge Mukesh