Shiv Lal Vs the State of Hp and Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.19084 of 2025 alongwith connected matters Decided on: 8^th December, 2025

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1. CWP No.19084 of 2025 Nand Lal …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2. CWP No.19086 of 2025 Mausami Negi …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3. CWP No.19120 of 2025 Shiv Lal …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Coram

¶4

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

¶5

Whether approved for reporting?¹ For the Petitioners: Mr. R.L. Verma, Advocate vice Mr. M.A. Safee, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

¶6

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

¶7

2

¶8

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

¶9

Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, learned Additional

¶10

Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.

¶11

2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matters are heard at this stage.

¶12

3. Petitioners’ grievance is that their representations (Annexure P-3) seeking applicability of Mohit Sharma & Anr. Versus State of H.P. & Ors.² have not been decided till date by the respondents/competent authority. Learned 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 representations in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer.

¶13

4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matters, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners (Annexure

¶14

P-3) in accordance with law as well as taking into

¶15

2 CWP No.1638 of 2024, decided on 29.11.2024

¶16

3

¶17

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.

¶18

The writ petitions stand disposed of in the above

¶19

terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if

¶20

any.

¶21

December 08, 2025 Mukesh

¶22

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge

Shiv Lal v. the State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Lal 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

Surinder Singh Vs the State of Hp and Others

Jeet Ram and Others Vs the State of Hp and Others

Udesh Chauhan and Others Vs the State of Hp and Others

Sudesh Kumari and Others Vs the State of Hp and Others

Rakesh Kaundal and Others Vs the State of Hp and Another

Hari Ram and Ors. Vs State of Hp and Ors.