Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 10415 (HP)

NEELAM NEGI v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/8636/2026 · 2026-05-27

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 8636/2026 Decided on: 27.05.2026 Neelam Negi …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Ms. Rajni Gandhi, Advocate. For the respondents: Ms. Seema Sharma, Deputy Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs: - “(a) Issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents not to evict the petitioner from the working woman hostel at Dhalpur, district Kullu and to permit her to continue in the occupation of allotted room, considering that she has no alternative accommodation and her service dispute is pending adjudication before the labour court. b) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to forthwith restore water supply and basic amenities to the petitioner's room and to ensure that the essential services are not withheld or discontinued in any manner during her stay in the hostel. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 c) In the alternative, and without prejudice to the above ,issue appropriate writ for quashing and setting aside the termination order dated discriminatory 01.07.2024,being arbitrary, ,violative of the RPwD Act 2016 and in violation of principle of natural justice and article 14and 21 of the Constitution.” 2. Petitioner seeks to retain Room No. 7 of Working Women Hostel, Dhalpur, Kullu, Tehsil & District Kullu, H.P. Though the writ petition gives narration of petitioner’s employment and her alleged wrongful termination from service by the respondents, it lacks the basis for claiming retention of the accommodation in the Working Women Hostel. 3. Confronted with above, learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the instant petition with liberty to file afresh, in accordance with law, with proper particulars, pleadings & documents. 4. Granting such permission, the instant petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 27th May, 2026(rohit)