Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 24198 (HP)

VISHAL SANDHU v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/15662/2026 · 2026-09-21

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. 15662 of 2026 Decided on: 21.09.2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Vishal Sandhu …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and Ors. .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Arush Matlotia, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajat Choudhary, Assistant Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Following order was passed in the matter on 10.09.2026: - “Notice at this stage confined to respondents No.1 to 5, which is waived by Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General. Petitioner contends that even though he was entitled to marks for experience in terms of recruitment notice at Annexure P-1 in view of certificate dated 05.12.2023 (appended at page 28 of the paper book), however, the screening committee did not give him any marks for his experience, as would be evident from Annexure P-5. Before notice is issued to other respondents, let learned Additional Advocate General have instructions in the matter as to why the petitioner has not been issued marks for his experience certificate. 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 List during the week commencing from 21.09.2026. Reply, if any, be also filed in the meanwhile.” 2. Reply to the petition is stated to have been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in view of the reply, there is necessity for the petitioner to place on record certain documents, which would have bearing on the redressal of the grievance raised by the petitioner, however, the same cannot be done in the present petition in its present form. Therefore, the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the instant petition with liberty to file afresh. In view of above, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 21st September, 2026 rohit