Disposed¶16

Himani Dhiman and Another v. the State of Hp and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC10 Oct 2025CWP/15877/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CWP No.15877 of 2025 | High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla | Decided 10.10.2025 | Sandeep Sharma, J. | Himani Dhiman and Anr. v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. | Petition disposed of without going into merits; respondents directed to consider and decide petitioners' representations in light of Coordinate Bench judgment in Mohit Sharma (CWP No. 1638 of 2024), preferably within four weeks, with opportunity of hearing; pending applications disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondents to consider and decide the petitioners' representations (Annexure P-3 Colly.) in light of Mohit Sharma (supra), expeditiously, preferably within four weeks, affording an opportunity of being heard. ¶16

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether directions should be issued to the respondents to consider the petitioners' representations in light of the Coordinate Bench judgment in Mohit Sharma (CWP No. 1638 of 2024), within a time bound manner.

¶12

Court's answer

This Court disposed of the present petition without going into the merits of the case, with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representations of the petitioners in light of Mohit Sharma (supra).

¶16

Ratio / Principle

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

¶16

Key takeaways

The authority concerned shall afford the petitioners an opportunity of being heard and pass appropriate orders thereafter; pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla (Sandeep Sharma, J.), CWP No.15877 of 2025 — Himani Dhiman and Anr. v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. (decided 10.10.2025): Before any reply could be called for, learned counsel for the petitioners drew the Court's attention to the judgment of a Coordinate Bench in CWP No. 1638 of 2024 (Mohit Sharma & Anr. v. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.), stating that the issue raised in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated therein, and sought directions for consideration of the petitioners' representations in its light in a time bound manner. The Additional Advocate General, appearing for the respondents, 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 (Annexure P-3 Colly.) in light of Mohit Sharma (supra), expeditiously, preferably within four weeks, affording the petitioners an opportunity of being heard and passing appropriate orders thereafter; pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No.15877 of 2025 Date of Decision: 10.10.2025

¶3

Himani Dhiman and Anr.

¶4

……...Petitioners Versus

¶5

State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors.

¶6

…....Respondents

¶7

Coram

¶8

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

¶9

For the Petitioners: Mr. Mandeep Chandel, Advocate.

¶10

For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General.

¶11

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

¶12

Before reply, if any, could be 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 representations of the petitioners in light of aforesaid judgment in a time bound manner.

¶13

¶14

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

¶15

Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, states that he is not averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioners.

¶16

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-3 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.

Himani Dhiman and Another v. the State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Himani Dhiman and Another v. the State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Naresh Kumar and Others Vs the State of Hp and Others

Savitri Devi Vs the State of Hp and Others

Vivek Modgil and Another Vs State of Hp and Others

Roop Ram Vs State of Hp and Others

Ajeet Singh Diwan and Others Vs State of Hp and Others

Malkiat Singh Vs the State of Hp and Others