Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 26539 (HP)

KULDEEP LAKHERWAL AND ORS v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/16504/2024 · 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, SHIMLA CWP No.16252 of 2024 alongwith connected matters Decided on: 10th January, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. CWP No.16252 of 2024 Karnail Singh and others …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. CWP No.16502 of 2024 Pardeep Kumar and others …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. CWP No.16504 of 2024 Kuldeep Lakherwal 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. Surender K. Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 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. 2. Admittedly, the petitioners have invoked extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India without even preferring any representation to the competent authority for the redressal of their grievances raised in the writ petitions. 3. Confronted with above, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners would be preferring representation(s) within two weeks from today. In case such a representation(s) is so made, the same shall be decided by the competent authority in accordance with law within a period of six weeks thereafter. The order so passed 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 January 10, 2025 Judge Mukesh