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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief granted in view of the Apex Court stay; with the consent of parties the petition was disposed of with a direction that benefits, if any, flowing to the petitioner under Satya Devi's case shall abide by the outcome of the Inder Pal's case; pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of the decision in CWP No.2274 of 2024 (Satya Devi v. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.) in view of the stay imposed on that judgment by the Hon'ble Apex Court.

Court's answer

Since it is quite apparent from the Apex Court order that the mandate contained in the judgment passed in Satya Devi's case along with connected matters has been stayed, the prayer made in the instant petition cannot be allowed.

Ratio / Principle

The petition is disposed of with a direction that benefits, if any, flowing to the petitioner under Satya Devi's case shall abide by the outcome of the Inder Pal's case instituted by the respondents against the common judgment rendered in Satya Devi's case.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Oral decision of a single-judge bench (Sandeep Sharma, Judge) of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla, in CWP No.3181 of 2025 (Kanta Devi v. State of Himachal Pradesh & others), decided 15.07.2025. The petitioner sought the benefit of the judgment in CWP No.2274 of 2024, Satya Devi v. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors., decided 28.05.2024. Learned Additional Advocate General Mr. B.C. Verma reported that the Satya Devi judgment has been stayed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.20496 of 2024, and an Apex Court order dated 24.03.2025 in several connected Special Leave Petitions (lead case: Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.11306 of 2025, State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. v. Inder Pal) was made available to the Court, recording inter alia that 'In the meantime the operation of the impugned order(s), is/are stayed.' Holding the Satya Devi mandate stayed, the Court declined the prayer and, with the consent of parties, disposed of the petition with a direction that benefits, if any, flowing to the petitioner under Satya Devi's case shall abide by the outcome of the Inder Pal's case instituted by the respondents against the common judgment rendered in Satya Devi's case. Pending application(s), if any, also stood disposed of.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.3181 of 2025

Date of Decision: 15.07.2025

____________ ___________________________________________ Kanta Devi …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?¹ For the Petitioner: Ms. Archna Dutt and Ms. Ranjana Pathania, Advocates. For the Respondents : Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): Through instant petition, petitioner seeks benefit of the decision rendered in judgment passed in CWP No.2274 of 2024 titled as Satya Devi Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors ., decided on 28.05.2024.

Mr. B.C. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General states that since judgment passed in Satya Devi’s case has been stayed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.20496 of 2024, relief, as prayed for, in the instant petition cannot be allowed. Copy of an order passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court on

24.03.2025 in several connected Special Leave Petitions, with lead

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

2

case being Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.11306 of 2025 titled as State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. Vs. Inder Pal, has been made available to this Court during proceedings of the case and same reads as under:-

“(1) Delay condoned.

(2) Let the notice be issued to the respondents(s) in all the matters.

(3) Tag alongwith SPL(C) No. 20496 of 2024

(4) In the meantime the operation of the impugned order(s), is/are stayed.”

Since it is quite apparent from the aforesaid order that mandate contained in the judgment passed in Satya Devi’s case along with connected matters has been stayed, prayer made in the instant petition cannot be allowed, but with the consent of parties, petition at hand is disposed of with a direction that benefits, if any, flowing to the petitioner under Satya Devi’s case, shall abide by the outcome of the Inder Pal’s case instituted by the respondents against the common judgment rendered in Satya Devi’s case. Ordered accordingly.

Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of

(Sandeep Sharma), Judge

July 15, 2025 (shankar)