Disposed

Pramod Kumar and Anr. v. State of Hp and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC16 Sept 2026CWP/16122/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioners sought directions for the respondents to decide their representation requesting applicability of the Inder Singh Thakur judgment. The High Court disposed of the writ petition directing the competent authority to consider and decide the representation in accordance with law and the cited judgment within six weeks and communicate the decision to the petitioners.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents/competent authority to consider and decide petitioners' representation dated 28.06.2026 in accordance with law and the Inder Singh Thakur judgment within six weeks and communicate the decision.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No.16122 of 2026

¶3

Decided on: 16^th September, 2026

¶4

Pramod Kumar and another …..Petitioners

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of H.P. and others

¶7

.....Respondents

¶8

Coram

¶9

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

¶10

Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶11

For the Petitioners: Mr. Yogesh Kumar Chandel, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General.

¶12

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

2. Petitioners’ grievance is that their representation dated 28.06.2026 (Annexure P-6) seeking applicability of

¶16

Inder Singh Thakur & Ors. Versus State of H.P. & Ors.²

¶17

has 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

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

¶21

respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representation in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer.

¶22

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 petitioners (Annexure P-6) 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 petitioners.

¶23

The writ petition stands disposed of in the above

¶24

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

¶25

September 16, 2026 Mukesh

¶26

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge

Pramod Kumar and Anr. v. State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramod Kumar and Anr. v. 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