DOLMA DEVI AND ANOTHER v. THE STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER
CWP/1071/2026 · 2026-01-09
Sandeep Sharma
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 6058 (HP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 6058 (HP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.1071 of 2026 Date of Decision: 09.01.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ Dolma Devi & Anr.
……...Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr.
…....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioners: Mr. Ajeet Singh Saklani, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Before reply, if any, from the respondents could be received, learned counsel representing the petitioners, while inviting attention of this Court to judgment passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 2500 of 2021, titled as Ranjit Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors., states that issue raised in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated by Coordinate Bench this Court in Ranjit Singh (supra) and as such, petitioners would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the petitioners in light of aforesaid judgment in a time bound manner.
2. While putting in appearance on behalf of respondents, Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General, states that he is
not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioners with regard to disposal of their representations.
3. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representations of the petitioners (Annexure P-4) in light of Ranjit Singh (supra), expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks from today. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners and pass appropriate orders thereafter. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. January 09, 2026 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil)
Judge 2