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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondents to consider and decide the petitioners' pending representations (Annexure P-8 to P-10) expeditiously, preferably within six weeks, after affording an opportunity of hearing and passing a detailed speaking order in terms of the judgment in Mohit Sharma (CWP No.1638 of 2024); liberty reserved to pursue further proceedings if aggrieved; pending applications, if any, disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners' pending representations (Annexure P-8 to P-10) should be considered and decided by the competent authority in a time bound manner in light of the judgment of the Coordinate Bench in CWP No.1638 of 2024 (Mohit Sharma).

Court's answer

Without going into the merits, the Court disposed of the petition with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the petitioners' pending representations (Annexure P-8 to P-10) expeditiously, preferably within six weeks.

Ratio / Principle

The concerned authority 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, wherein the issue already stands adjudicated.

Key takeaways

Liberty is reserved to the petitioners to file appropriate proceedings in an appropriate Court of law if they still remain aggrieved.ratio¶¶8

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition – disposed of at the outset without notices and without going into merits – on learned counsel's stated instruction, respondents directed to consider and decide petitioners' pending representations (Annexure P-8 to P-10) expeditiously, preferably within six weeks – decision to be taken in accordance with the judgment of the Coordinate Bench in Mohit Sharma and Another v. State of H.P. and Others, CWP No.1638 of 2024, wherein the issue already stands adjudicated – authority to afford opportunity of hearing and pass detailed speaking order – liberty reserved to petitioners to approach appropriate Court if still aggrieved – pending applications disposed of (Sandeep Sharma, J.; decision dated 08.12.2025).

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Civil Writ Petition No.19247 of 2025 Date of Decision: 08.12.2025

Inderjit Kaur and Others ……...Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Others …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioners: Mr. R.S. Jagota, proxy counsel, for Mr. Shubham Sharma, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________

Sandeep Sharma, J. (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 representations (Annexure P-8 to P-10) are 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. 2. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, fairly states that he is not 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 in accordance with the aforesaid judgment.

2

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 representations (Annexure P-8 to P-10) 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.

December 08, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), Rajeev Raturi Judge

Judge