Disposed

Sandeep Kumar v. the State of Hp and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC15 Sept 2026CWP/15937/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court of Himachal Pradesh disposed of a writ petition, directing the competent authority to decide the petitioner's representation on the applicability of a specific judgment within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the petitioner's representation within six weeks from the date of the order.

Sandeep Kumar Vs the State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Himachal Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No. 15937 of 2026. Decided on :15th September , 2026

¶3

Sandeep Kumar ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ....Respondents.
*Coram:*
*Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge.*
Whether approved for reporting?¹
For the Petitioner: Mr. Karan Sharma, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Rajat Chaudhary, Assistant Advocate General.

¶4

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge.

¶5

Notice. Mr. Rajat Chaudhary, learned Assistant Advocate

¶6

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

¶7

2. Petitioner’s grievance is that his representation (Annexure P-

¶8

2), seeking applicability of Inder Singh Thakur & Ors Vs. State of H.P. &

¶9

Ors.² has not been decided till date by the respondents/competent authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be content in case the respondents/competent authority(s) are

¶10

directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representation in

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

¶14

accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Assistant Advocate General is not averse to this prayer.

¶15

3 . 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 petitioner in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner.

¶16

The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so

¶17

also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.

¶18

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge

¶19

15^th September, 2026. (jai)

Sandeep Kumar v. the State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Kumar v. the State of Hp and Others

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