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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the petitioners' pending representation (Annexure P-5 Colly) expeditiously, preferably within six weeks, after affording an opportunity of hearing and by way of a detailed speaking order rendered in light of the Coordinate Bench judgment in CWP No.1638 of 2024 (Mohit Sharma); liberty reserved to the petitioners to seek further remedies if aggrieved; pending applications, if any, disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the competent authority ought to consider and decide the petitioners' pending representation (Annexure P-5 Colly) in light of the judgment of the Coordinate Bench in CWP No.1638 of 2024 (Mohit Sharma), wherein the underlying issue stands adjudicated.

Court's answer

Without going into the merits, the Court disposed of the petition, directing the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation (Annexure P-5 Colly) of the petitioners expeditiously, preferably within six weeks.

Ratio / Principle

In acting on the representation, the authority concerned shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass a detailed speaking order taking note of the Coordinate Bench judgment in Mohit Sharma (CWP No.1638 of 2024).

Key takeaways

Liberty was reserved to the petitioners to institute appropriate proceedings in an appropriate Court of law if they still remain aggrieved.ratio¶9

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Himachal Pradesh (Sandeep Sharma, J.) disposed of CWP No.15709 of 2025 (Shri Lucky and Others v. State of Himachal Pradesh & Others) without examining the merits, at the pre-notice stage, on the joint prayer of counsel: the respondents were directed to consider and decide the petitioners' pending representation (Annexure P-5 Colly) expeditiously, preferably within six weeks, after affording an opportunity of hearing and by passing a detailed speaking order taking note of the Coordinate Bench judgment in CWP No.1638 of 2024 (Mohit Sharma and Another v. State of H.P. and Others), wherein the very issue sought to be raised already stands adjudicated. Liberty was reserved to the petitioners to pursue appropriate proceedings if still aggrieved. Pending applications, if any, stood disposed of.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.15709 of 2025

Date of Decision: 06.10.2025

_______________________________________________________ Shri Lucky and Others …….Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others ….Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?¹ For the Petitioners: Mr. M.A. Safee, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General, for State. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): Before notices, if any, could be issued to the respondents, learned counsel representing the petitioners, on instructions, states that his clients would be content and satisfied in case their pending representation (Annexure P-5 Colly) is considered and decided by the competent authority in light of judgment rendered by Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No.1638 of 2024, titled as Mohit Sharma and Another Vs. State of H.P. and Others , in a time bound manner.

Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, representing the respondents/State, fairly states that he is not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioners and

1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2

representation, if any, filed by the petitioners shall be considered and decided in accordance with the aforesaid judgment

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 pending representation (Annexure P-5 Colly) of the petitioners expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass detailed speaking order thereupon taking note of the judgment rendered by Coordinate Bench of this Court in Mohit Sharma case (supra), wherein issue otherwise sought to be decided in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated. Liberty is reserved to the petitioners to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate Court of law, if they still remain aggrieved.

Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

(Sandeep Sharma), Judge

October 06, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)