Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 7358 (HP)

TRILOKI NATH v. STATE OF HP AND ORS

CWP/3827/2025 · 2025-08-21

Sandeep Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3827 of 2025 Date of Decision: 21.08.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Triloki Nath ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. M.A.Safee, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Before reply could be called for from the respondents, learned counsel for the petitioner states that his client would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of judgment dated 28.05.2025 passed in CWP No. 5390/2024 titled as Surya Prabha & Ors. Vs State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors., in time bound manner. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to the aforesaid innocuous prayer made by the petitioner. 2. Having perused aforesaid judgment sought to be relied upon vis-à-vis issue raised in the petition at hand, this Court finds that issue raised in the instant petition already stands adjudicated in the aforesaid judgment rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and as such, no prejudice would be caused to either of the parties in case respondents are directed to consider and decide case of the petitioner in light of the aforesaid judgment. 3. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide case of the petitioner in light of Surya Prabha (supra), expeditiously, preferably, within six weeks from today. In case, petitioner is found to be similarly situate to the petitioners in the aforesaid judgment, he would be extended similar benefits. Needless to say, authority concerned while doing the needful in terms of the instant order shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass speaking order thereupon. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. August 21, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge 2