Disposed

Sanjay Kumar v. the State of Hp and Anr.

Himachal Pradesh HC14 Sept 2026CWP/15846/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a notice case filed under Article 226, the Single Judge directed the competent authority to consider and decide the petitioners' representations regarding the applicability of the principles laid down in Inder Singh Thakur & Ors. vs. State of H.P. & Ors.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the petitioners' representations within six weeks.

Sanjay Kumar Vs the State of Hp and Anr. — Service and Employment | Himachal Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No.15846 of 2026 Decided on: 14.09.2026

¶3

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sanjay Kumar & Anr. …..Petitioners Versus

¶4

State of H.P. and Anr. .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Coram

¶5

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

¶6

Whether approved for reporting?¹ For the Petitioners: Mr. Rocky, Advocate. For the Respondents: Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General.

¶7

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

¶8

Notice. Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

¶9

2. Petitioners’ grievance is that their respective representation at Annexure P-4(colly) seeking applicability of Inder Singh Thakur & Ors. 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

¶10

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

¶11

2 CWP No.4830 of 2023, decided alongwith connected matter on 07.04.2025

¶12

¶13

in accordance with law within a time bound manner. Learned Deputy Advocate General has no objection to this prayer.

¶14

Having regard to the above submissions, but without

¶15

examining the merits of the matters, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners, in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment, within a period of six weeks from today. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioners. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

¶16

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge

¶17

14^th September, 2026 rohit

Sanjay Kumar v. the State of Hp and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Kumar v. the State of Hp and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases