2026:HHC:29387 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. LPA No. 409 of 2026 Date of decision: 16.07.2026 Sumit Chaudhary …Appellant Versus State of H. P. & Ors. …Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice G. S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin C. Negi, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Appellant: Mr. Atharv Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Arsh Rattan, Deputy Advocate General. G. S. Sandhawalia , Chief Justice (Oral) The grouse that has been put-forward in appeal by the learned counsel for the appellant is against the order passed in CWP No. 10451 of 2026, titled Sumit Chaudhary vs. The State of H.P. & Ors., on 29.06.2026, is that the one of the reliefs sought, as such, in the writ petition was that directions for appointment of learned Financial Commissioner be issued, so that the revision filed by the petitioner could be heard and decided. 2. It is the case of the appellant that the revision had been filed against the order dated 27.01.2026, passed by the learned Divisional Commissioner, Kangra at Dharamshala in 2 2026:HHC:29387 case No. 49 of 2025 and the same was listed for hearing before the Financial Commissioner on 03.07.2026 at Shimla, however, the same could not be taken up. Apparently, before the matter could be taken up, the writ petition had been filed for the said relief which leading to passing of the order dated 29.06.2026, which is now subject matter of challenge. 3. A perusal of the order dated 29.06.2026, would go on to show that the learned Single Judge, as such, has left open the issue of interim relief, which is to be decided by the Financial Commissioner on its own merit, without being influenced by any of the observations made, without granting interim relief. 4. In such circumstances, we had asked the State as such on 14.07.2026 whether the charge of Financial Commissioner (Appeals) has been given to some other officer or not. Learned counsel for the State has placed on record Notification dated 06.07.2026, whereby Dr. Abhishek Jain has been given the charge of Financial Commissioner (Appeals). 5. In such circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the main grievance of the petitioner as such, which had been pressed now, has been rendered infructuous, as the said officer has been given the charge. 3 2026:HHC:29387 5. Resultantly, we dispose of the present appeal leaving it open to the appellant to press for his reliefs before the Financial Commissioner (Appeals). 6. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (G. S. Sandhawalia) Chief Justice (Bipin C. Negi) 16th July, 2026 (sanjeev) Judge