Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 5722 (HP)

SEEMA GUPTA AND OTHERS v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/670/2026 · 2026-01-08

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.670 of 2026 Decided on: 8th January, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Seema Gupta and others …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. K.S. Gill, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Vishwadeep Sharma, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Vishwadeep Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 3. Petitioners’ grievance is that their representations (Annexure P-6) seeking applicability of Sanjay Kumar Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others2 have not been decided till date by the 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 CWPOA No.5536 of 2020, decided alongwith connected matters on 01.11.2023 2 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. 4. 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 representations of the petitioners (Annexure P-6) in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Sanjay Kumar2 within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua January 08, 2026 Judge Mukesh