Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 5472 (HP)

ITIKA v. THE STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER

CWP/814/2025 · 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. 912 of 2025 alongwith connected matters Decided on: 10th January, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. CWP No. 912 of 2025 Kumari Muskan …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P.& others. .....Respondents 2. CWP No.814 of 2025 Itika …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P.& others. .....Respondents 3. CWP No. 817 of 2025 Anjana Kumari …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P.& others. .....Respondents 4.CWP No. 816 of 2025 Saveena Jhan …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P.& others. .....Respondents 5.CWP No.815 of 2025 Deepika Janjiha …..Petitioner 2 Versus State of H.P.& others. .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Kiran Kumar Chauhan, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. Dalip Kumar Sharma, Additional Advocate General ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Dalip Kumar Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents in all the petitions. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners in all the petitions submits that the legal issue involved in the cases has already been adjudicated upon; Petitioners have filed representations dated 24.11.2024 for the redressal of their grievances raised in 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. 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 3 The above is not objected to by learned Additional Advocate General. 3. In view of the above, this writ petitions are disposed of by directing the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners dated 24.11.2024 in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from today. The order so passed be also 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 veena