Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 26353 (HP)

SUDESH KUMAR v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/17308/2026 · 2026-10-06

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.17308 of 2026 Decided on: 6th October, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sudesh Kumar …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Mamta Bhatwan, Advocate vice Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Ms. Seema Sharma, Deputy Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Ms. Seema Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. Petitioner’s grievance is that his representation dated 11.07.2026 (Annexure P-4) seeking applicability of Sarvo Devi and others Versus State of H.P. and others2 has not been decided till date by the respondents/ competent authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 CWP No.8127/2013, decided on 13.5.2014 2 submitted that the petitioner would be content in case the respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representation in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Deputy Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 3. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner (Annexure P-4) in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua October 06, 2026 Judge Mukesh