The petitioner's counsel sought and obtained permission to withdraw the writ petition. The court dismissed the petition as withdrawn and disposed of any pending miscellaneous applications.
Petition dismissed as withdrawn; pending miscellaneous applications disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No. 1924/2019 Decided on: 19.09.2026
Dayawanti …..Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents.
……………………………………………………………………………. Coram
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioner:
Mr. Lokesh, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Seema Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr. Shyam Singh Chandel, Central Government Counsel, for respondent No.4.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J
Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to
withdraw the instant petition. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed
as withdrawn. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge
19th September, 2026(rohit)
1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes
Dayawanti
State of H.P.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
