Santosh Kumari and Anr. Vs the State of Hp and Anr. — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Santosh Kumari and Anr. Vs the State of Hp and Anr. — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of with direction to respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the petitioners' representation (Annexure P-4) in accordance with law, taking into consideration the Mohit Sharma judgment, within six weeks, and to communicate the decision to the petitioners; pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents/competent authority should be directed to consider and decide the petitioners' representation (Annexure P-4) seeking applicability of the Mohit Sharma judgment, in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule.

Court's answer

Without examining the merits of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the petitioners' representation (Annexure P-4) in accordance with law.

Ratio / Principle

In deciding the representation, the competent authority is to take into consideration the judgment in Mohit Sharma (CWP No.1638 of 2024, decided on 29.11.2024), within a period of six weeks.

Key takeaways

The decision arrived at on the representation shall be communicated to the petitioners.ratio¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Santosh Kumari and another v. State of H.P. and another, CWP No.18810 of 2025 (High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla; Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J.; decided 2nd December, 2025): The petitioners' representation (Annexure P-4) seeking applicability of the judgment in Mohit Sharma & Anr. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. (CWP No.1638 of 2024, decided on 29.11.2024) had not been decided by the respondents/competent authority. With consent of counsel, the matter was heard at the stage of notice, the learned Assistant Advocate General not being averse to the prayer. Without examining the merits, the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the representation (Annexure P-4) in accordance with law, taking into consideration the Mohit Sharma judgment, within six weeks, and to communicate the decision so arrived at to the petitioners. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stood disposed of likewise.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.18810 of 2025

Decided on: 2^nd December, 2025

Santosh Kumari and another …..Petitioners

Versus

State of H.P. and another

.....Respondents

Coram

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Whether approved for reporting?¹

For the Petitioners: Mr. Vikrant Chandel, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. Rajat Choudhry, Assistant Advocate General.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

Notice. Mr. Rajat Choudhry, learned Assistant

Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on

behalf of the respondents.

2. With the consent of learned counsel for the

parties, the matter is heard at this stage.

3. Petitioners’ grievance is that their representation (Annexure P-4) seeking applicability of Mohit Sharma &

Anr. Versus State of H.P. & Ors.² has not been decided

till date by the respondents/competent authority. Learned

1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.

2 CWP No.1638 of 2024, decided on 29.11.2024

2

counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners would be content in case the respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representation in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Assistant Advocate General is not averse to this prayer.

4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioners (Annexure P-4) in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Mohit Sharma² within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners.

The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge

December 02, 2025 Mukesh