Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 32001 (HP)

SURJEET KUMAR AND OTHERS v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/16202/2025 · 2025-10-15

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.16196 of 2025 alongwith CWP No.16202 of 2025 Decided on: 15th October, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. CWP No.16196 of 2025 Kewal Singh and others …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. CWP No.16202 of 2025 Surjeet Kumar and others …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Tanishq Chandel, Advocate vice Mr. Kush Sharma, 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 06.07.2025 and 20.08.2025 (Annexure P-3) 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 (Annexure P-3) 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 2 CWP No.8148 of 2022, decided alongwith connected matters on 21.03.2024 3 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 October 15, 2025 Judge Mukesh