Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 22495 (HP)

ASHOK KUMAR CHANDEL v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/15638/2026 · 2026-09-10

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.15628 of 2026 alongwith CWP No.15638 of 2026 Decided on: 10th September, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. CWP No.15628 of 2026 Ashwani Kumar …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. CWP No.15638 of 2026 Ashok Kumar Chandel …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Vivek Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 2. Petitioners’ grievance is that their representations (Annexure P-2 in both these matters) seeking applicability of Inder Singh Thakur & Ors. Versus State of H.P. & Ors.2 have not been decided till date by the respondents/competent authority. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners would be content in case the respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representations in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 3. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matters, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners (Annexure P-2) in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Inder Singh Thakur2 within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners. 2 CWP No.4830 of 2023, decided alongwith connected matter on 07.04.2025 3 The writ petitions stand disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua September 10, 2026 Judge Mukesh