Disposed¶11

Nirmala Devi v. the State of Hp and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC8 May 2026CWP/4965/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Withdrawal of writ petition (CWP No.4965 of 2026, Nirmala Devi v. State of H.P. & Ors, High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla, Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge, decided 08.05.2026) on account of defects in pleadings; liberty to file fresh petition; return of demarcation report Annexure P-3 subject to duly attested photocopy; pending miscellaneous applications disposed of; procedural order only, no statute or precedent engaged.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh petition in accordance with law; demarcation report (Annexure P-3) returned to petitioner's counsel subject to supplying a duly attested photocopy; pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stood disposed of. ¶11

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No.4965 of 2026 Decided on: 08.05.2026

¶3

_________________________________________________________________ Nirmala Devi ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors …Respondents ________________________________________________________________ Coram_

¶4

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

¶5

1 Whether approved for reporting?

¶6

_________________________ For the petitioner:	______________________ Mr. Himanshu Vice Mr. Rakesh Advocate.	__________________ Thakur, Advocate Kumar Thakur,
For the respondents:	Mr. Anup Rattan, with Mr. Y.P.S.D Advocate.	Advocate General, haulta, Additional

¶7

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶9

there are some defects in the pleadings as some relevant facts have also not been mentioned therein, therefore, petitioner be permitted to withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to file fresh petition in accordance with law.

¶10

2. Granting such liberty, present petition to

¶11

disposed of as withdrawn.

¶12

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes

¶13

¶14

3. Learned counsel for petitioner also prays that

¶15

demarcation report appended alongwith the writ petition at Annexure P-3, be returned to the petitioner. Demarcation report Annexure P-3 be returned to learned counsel for the petitioner subject to supplying and replacing with duly attested photocopy of the same.

¶16

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of.

¶17

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge

¶18

May 08, 2026 R.Atal

Nirmala Devi v. the State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nirmala 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pratap Singh Rana Vs Satwant Atwal

Sandip Kumar Vs State Election Commission and Others

Radha Devi Vs State of Hp and Others

Sher Singh Vs Hpsebl and Another

Vijay Pal Vs Nipun Jindal

Piyush Garg Vs State of Hp and Others