PRITAM SINGH v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS
Court: High Court of Himachal Pradesh
Bench: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTSNA REWAL DUA
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Himachal Pradesh judgment dated 2025-10-31. PRITAM SINGH v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 16955 of 2025 st Decided on: 31 October, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pritam Singh ….. Petitioner Versus State of H. P. and others ..... Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Bonit Thakur, Advocate vice Mr. A. K. Gupta, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No. 1 to 4. Mr. Tek Ram Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No. 5. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General and Mr. Tek Ram Sharma, learned counsel, appear and waive service of notice on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 4 and respondent No.
5, respectively. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 3. Petitioner, aged 64 years, seeks applicability of Sunder Singh Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh & Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. Ors. , Balo Devi & others Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others and Roop Lal Vs. State of 4 Himachal Pradesh and others , as according to him, applicability of these decisions would make him entitled to pension. It is, however, seen from the record that the petitioner has not preferred any representation for the redressal of his grievances raised in the writ petition. 4. Confronted with above, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be preferring a representation within two weeks from today.
In case such a representation is so made, the same shall be decided by the competent authority in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgments within a period of six weeks thereafter. The order so passed shall also be communicated to the petitioner. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua October 31, 2025 Judge Mukesh Civil Appeal No. 6309 of 2017, decided on 08. 03. 2018 Civil Appeal No. 4792 of 2022, decided on 18. 07. 2022 LPA No. 196 of 2022, decided on 11. 10. 2023
Source: High Court of Himachal Pradesh. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.