IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.16982 of 2026 Date of Decision: 28.09.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ Bhupinder Singh ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General, for the respondents- State. Mr. L.S. Mehta, Advocate, for respondent No.3. Ms. Kanta Thakur, Advocate, for respondent No.4. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the following main relief:- “a. That appropriate writ or directions may very kindly be issued to the respondent University to issue the degree of B.Tech (Electronics & Communication Engineering) along with all other relevant documents including the Original DMCs of 4th to 8th semesters in favour of the petitioner, in the interest of law and justice in a time bound manner.” 2. Having regard to the nature of the prayer and order proposed to be passed in the instant proceedings, this Court sees no 2 necessity to call for reply on behalf of the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General, Mr. L.S. Mehta and Ms. Kanta Thakur, Advocates. 3. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, is that despite there being repeated requests, degree of B.Tech (Electronics and Communication Engineering), along with all other relevant documents, including original DMCs of 4th to 8th semesters, are not being released by the respondent-university, as a result thereof, career of the petitioner is at stake. 4. Learned counsel representing the parties fairly state that case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP (Civil) No. 15180/2025, titled Pratima Das v. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, decided on 06.01.2026, wherein petitioner therein was found to be enrolled in the green register, but her name was not reflected in the admission disclosure list. Instead, the name of another person had been mentioned against the admission number assigned to Pratima Das. Respondent No.3-University acknowledged the mistake at its end while preparing the admission disclosure list, wherein the name of Pratima Das had not been mentioned. Hon'ble Apex Court passed the following order:- 3 “20. From the above affidavit and documents on record, it is undisputed that the Appellant has been a bona fide student of MB University and had cleared all her examinations. It is also evident that the exclusion of the name of the Appellant in the admission disclosure list has occurred due to no fault on part of the Appellant, rather the same is at the hands of the University for which the Appellant cannot be made to suffer. 21. Having regard to the above established facts based on records, we are of the view that the Appellant has been deprived of her documents for no fault of hers for a substantial period of time and relegating her to another court of competent jurisdiction as observed by the High Court vide the impugned order dated 20.12.2024 would no more be required as there is no factual dispute left. 22. In view of the above, the appeal is allowed and MB University is directed to issue the marksheets of 5th to 10th semester, the degree and any other relevant documents, if any, to the Appellant within four weeks from today.” 5. Learned counsel representing the respondent-university fairly submits that case of the petitioner is squarely covered in terms of Pratima Das (supra). It is not in dispute that petitioner was a bona fide student of the respondent-university and had cleared his examination. However, due to a clerical error, his name was not included in the admission disclosure list sent to HPPERC, rather name of some other person was erroneously mentioned in place of the petitioner's name and roll number. 6. Consequently, having taken note of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Pratibha Das (supra), the present petition is allowed with a direction to the respondent-university to issue 4 detailed marksheets as well as the degree, along with relevant documents, if any, to the petitioner within a period of two weeks from today. Petition stands disposed of. 7. The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms, along with all pending applications. ; (Sandeep Sharma ) Judge September 28, 2026 (sunil)