Disposed¶¶9

Seema Devi v. the State of Hp and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC6 Jan 2026CWP/363/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Seema Devi v. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors., CWP No.363 of 2026 (HP HC, Sandeep Sharma, J., 06.01.2026): representation disposal writ disposed of without examining merits; respondents directed to decide representation (Annexure P-1) in light of Mohit Sharma, CWP No. 1638 of 2024, within six weeks, with hearing and speaking order. Keywords: representation, time-bound disposal, six weeks, speaking order, coordinate bench, Mohit Sharma.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to consider and decide petitioner's representation (Annexure P-1) in light of Mohit Sharma (CWP No. 1638 of 2024), expeditiously, preferably within six weeks, after affording an opportunity of being heard and passing a speaking order; pending applications, if any, disposed of. ¶¶9

Seema Devi Vs the State of Hp and Others — Himachal Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No.363 of 2026 Date of Decision: 06.01.2026

¶3

_____________________________________________________________________ Seema Devi ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Vaibhav Tanwar, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General. ___________________________________________________________________________

¶4

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

¶5

Before reply, if any, from the respondents could be received, learned counsel representing the petitioner, while inviting attention of this Court to judgment passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 1638 of 2024, titled as Mohit Sharma & Anr. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. , states that issue raised in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated by Coordinate Bench of this Court in Mohit Sharma ( supra ) and as such, petitioner would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide her representation in light of aforesaid judgment in a time bound manner.

¶6

While putting in appearance on behalf of respondents, Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, states that he is not

¶7

¶8

averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner with regard to disposal of her representation.

¶9

Consequently, in view of the above, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner (Annexure P-1) in light of Mohit Sharma (supra) , expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks from today. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass speaking order thereafter. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

¶10

January 06, 2026 (sunil)

¶11

(Sandeep Sharma), Judge

Seema Devi v. the State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Seema Devi v. the State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunil Kumar Vs the State of Hp and Others

Rama Devi Vs the State of Hp and Others

Kalu Ram Vs State

Parveen Pathania and Others Vs the State of Hp and Another

Manish Kumar Arya Vs Hpsebl and Others

Manoj Kumar Bansal and Ors. Vs Rekesh Kanwar and Ors.