Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2026:HHC:31755 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No.12814 of 2026 Decided on: 31.07.2026 Ram Lal & others … Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ____________________________________________________
_
For the petitioners: Mr. K.S. Gill, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Rahul Thakur, Deputy Advocate General, for the respondents-State. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) Notice. Mr. Rahul Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents-State. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has referred to the order passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.6436 of 2012, i.e. in the earlier writ petition preferred by the petitioners in this petition, except petitioner No.5 Shri Jeewan Singh, who did file any petition.
2. In terms of Annexure P-8, the Hon’ble Division Bench in the earlier petition filed by the petitioners was pleased to confer similar treatment upon the petitioner therein as to the petitioner in CWP No.5530 of 2010, titled Chaman and others Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, dated 03.07.2012.
3.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
judgment of the learned Single Judge in CWP No.5530 of 2010 was assailed by the State by way of a Letter Patent Appeal and the 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2 2026:HHC:31755 Letters Patent Appeal was disposed of vide Annexure P-9 by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court on 05.11.2018. He submitted that even thereafter, till date nothing has been done by the respondents.
4. This Court is of the considered view that the remedy of the petitioners, i.e. those petitioners who were a party in CWP No.6436 of 2012, if any, is to seek execution of the judgment passed in their favour and not by filing a writ.
5. Accordingly, as prayed for, this petition is allowed to be withdrawn, with liberty to the petitioners, who were party in the writ petition, to approach the Court, if so advised by way of execution proceedings.
6. The petition stands disposed of, so also pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.
(Ajay Mohan Goel)
Judge July 31, 2026 (Rishi)