Ram Lal Vs the State of Hp and Others — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Ram Lal Vs the State of Hp and Others — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider and decide the petitioner's case in light of Jeewan Lata (supra), expeditiously, preferably within six weeks; similar benefits to be extended if the petitioner is found similarly situate; opportunity of hearing and speaking order required; pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents should be directed to consider and decide the petitioner's case in light of the judgment in Jeewan Lata v. State of Punjab and Ors (CWP No. 10238 of 2017, decided 10.5.2019), and extend similar benefits if the petitioner is found similarly situate.

Court's answer

The issue raised in the instant petition already stands adjudicated in the judgment in Jeewan Lata (supra), and no prejudice would be caused to either party in directing the respondents to consider and decide the petitioner's case in light of that judgment.

Ratio / Principle

The petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider and decide the petitioner's case in light of Jeewan Lata (supra), expeditiously, preferably within six weeks.

Key takeaways

If the petitioner is found to be similarly situate to the petitioner in the Jeewan Lata judgment, he would be extended similar benefits.ratio¶10
The authority concerned, while acting in terms of the order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass a speaking order.ratio¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (CWP No.11121 of 2025, decided 14.7.2025) before the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla (Sandeep Sharma, J.) disposed of at the threshold, before calling for any reply, on the joint prayer of the parties. The petitioner sought a direction to the respondents to consider and decide his case in light of the judgment dated 10.5.2019 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in CWP No. 10238 of 2017 (O&M), Jeewan Lata v. State of Punjab and Ors. The Court found that the issue raised was already adjudicated in that judgment and that no prejudice would be caused by directing consideration in its light. The respondents were directed to consider and decide the petitioner's case in light of Jeewan Lata (supra) expeditiously, preferably within six weeks; if the petitioner is found similarly situate, similar benefits are to be extended; the authority shall afford an opportunity of hearing and pass a speaking order. Pending application(s), if any, also stood disposed of.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.11121 of 2025 Date of Decision: 14.7.2025

_____________________________________________________________________ Ram Lal ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. …....Respondents

Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Ms. Sakshi Thakur, Proxy Counsel.

For the respondent: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No. 1 to 7. Mr. Tek Ram Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.8. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

Before reply, if any, could be called for from the respondents, learned Proxy Counsel appearing for the petitioner while referring to judgment dated 10.5.2019, passed by Punjab and Haryana High Court in CWP No. 10238 of 2017 (O&M), titled Jeewan Lata v. State of Punjab and Ors ., states that petitioner would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide case of the petitioner in light of afore judgment. 2. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, who has put in appearance on behalf of the respondents, is not averse to the aforesaid innocuous prayer made by the petitioner.

2

3. Having perused aforesaid judgment sought to be relied

upon vis-à-vis issue raised in the petition at hand, this Court finds that issue raised in the instant petition already stands adjudicated in the aforesaid judgment and as such, no prejudice would be caused to either of the parties in case respondents are directed to consider and decide case of the petitioner in light of the aforesaid judgment.

4. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider and decide case of the petitioner in light of Jeewan Lata (supra), expeditiously, preferably, within six weeks from today. In case, petitioner is found to be similarly situate to the petitioner in the aforesaid judgment, he would be extended similar benefits. Needless to say, authority concerned while doing the needful in terms of the instant order shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass speaking order thereupon. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

July 14, 2025 Manjit

(Sandeep Sharma), Judge