Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 37281 (HP)

NAVEEN SHARMA v. THE STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER

CWP/19416/2025 · 2025-12-10

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP Nos.19402, 19404 and 19416 of 2025 Decided on: 10.12.2025. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. CWP No.19402/2025 Amit Kumar Thakur …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents 2. CWP No.19404/2025 Meenu Rani …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents 3. CWP No.19416/2025 Naveen Sharma …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Harmohan Thakur, Advocate vice Mr. Vinod 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 in all the petitions. 1 Whether 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, all these matters are heard at this stage. 3. Petitioner(s) grievances are that their representations dated 04.08.2025 (Annexure P-3), seeking applicability of Yashwant Kumar Vs. State of H.P. & Ors.2 have not been decided till date by the respondents/competent authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submitted that the petitioner(s) would be content, in case, respondents/competent authority are directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioner(s), in accordance with law, within a time bound manner. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection to this prayer. 4. Having regard to the above submissions, but without examining the merits of the matters, the instant writ petitions are disposed of by directing the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioner(s), in accordance with law and as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in case of Yashwant Kumar2, within a period of six weeks from today. The order so passed be also 2 CWP No. 8148 of 2022, decided a/w connected matters on 21.03.2024 3 communicated to the petitioner(s). Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua December 10, 2025 Judge yogesh