ANJANA KUMARI v. STATE OF HP AND ORS
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 2025-11-04. ANJANA KUMARI v. STATE OF HP AND ORS. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP Nos. 17153 & 17155 of 2025 Decided on: 04. 11. 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. CWP No. 17153 of 2025 Anjana Kumari ….. Petitioner Versus State of H. P. and Anr ..... Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. CWP No. 17155 of 2025 Jagita Devi and Anr ….. Petitioners Versus State of H. P. and Anr ..... Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioners: Mr. Amit Kumar Dhumal and Ms. Parul Negi, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr.
Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matters are heard at this stage. 3. Petitioners’ grievance is that their representations, annexed with the respective writ petitions, seeking applicability of Mohit Sharma & Anr. Versus 2 State of H. P. & Ors. have 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 respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representations in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 4.
Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matters, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in 2 the case of Mohit Sharma within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners. CWP No. 1638 of 2024, decided on 29. 11. 2024 The writ petitions stand disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua November 4, 2025 Judge R. Atal
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.