Khem Raj and Others Vs the State of Hp and Another — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Khem Raj and Others Vs the State of Hp and Another — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to the respondents to consider and decide the petitioners' representations (Annexure P-1 Colly.) in light of Mohit Sharma (supra), expeditiously, preferably within four weeks, after affording the petitioners an opportunity of being heard; pending applications disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether directions should be issued to the respondents to consider and decide the petitioners' representations (Annexure P-1 Colly.) in light of the Coordinate Bench judgment in Mohit Sharma (CWP No. 1638 of 2024) in a time bound manner.

Court's answer

Without going into the merits, the Court disposed of the petition directing the respondents to consider and decide the petitioners' representations (Annexure P-1 Colly.) in light of Mohit Sharma (supra).

Ratio / Principle

The consideration and decision of the representations was to be done expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks.

Key takeaways

The authority concerned, while acting in terms of the order, shall afford the petitioners an opportunity of being heard and pass appropriate orders thereafter; pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Khem Raj and Ors. v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., CWP No.11379 of 2025 (High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla; Sandeep Sharma, J.; decided 16.07.2025): The petitioners, relying on a Coordinate Bench judgment of the same Court in CWP No. 1638 of 2024, Mohit Sharma & Anr. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors., prayed for directions to the respondents to consider their representations (Annexure P-1 Colly.) in light of that judgment in a time bound manner. The learned Deputy Advocate General stated he was not averse to the prayer. Without going into the merits, the Court disposed of the petition, directing the respondents to consider and decide the representations in light of Mohit Sharma (supra), expeditiously, preferably within four weeks, affording the petitioners an opportunity of being heard before passing appropriate orders; pending applications, if any, stood disposed of.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.11379 of 2025 Date of Decision: 16.7.2025

_____________________________________________________________________ Khem Raj and Ors. ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors.

……...Petitioner Versus …....Respondents

Coram

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?

For the Petitioners: Mr. Vaibhav Tanwar, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General.

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

Before reply, if any, called for from the respondents, learned counsel representing the petitioners, while inviting attention of this Court to judgment passed by Coordinate Bench this Court in CWP No. 1638 of 2024 titled Mohit Sharma & Anr. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. , states that issue raised in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated by Coordinate Bench this Court in Mohit Sharma ( supra ) and as such, petitioners would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider the representations (Annexure P-1 Colly.) of the petitioners in light of aforesaid judgment in a time bound manner.

2 -

2. While putting in appearance on behalf of respondents, Mr.

Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, states that he is not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioners and representations, if any, filed by the petitioners shall be considered and decided expeditiously.

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-1 Colly.) in light of Mohit Sharma (supra) , expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks. 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.

July 16, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge