SHYAMA NAND AND ANOTHER v. THE STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER
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 2025-10-29. SHYAMA NAND AND ANOTHER v. THE STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER. Read the judgment and case details on...
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 15358 of 2025 th Decided on: 29 October, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shyama Nand and another ….. Petitioners Versus State of H. P. and another ..... Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioners: Mr. M. A. Safee, Advocate vice Mr. Mohar Chand Bharadwaj, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Y. P. S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Y. P. S. Dhaulta, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 3.
Petitioners’ grievance is that their representations (Annexure P-4) seeking applicability of Madan Lal Sharma Versus State of Himachal Pradesh Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. and another 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 matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representations of the petitioners (Annexure P-4) in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration 2 the above judgment in the case of Madan Lal Sharma within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua October 29, 2025 Judge Mukesh CWP No. 3341 of 2019, decided on 04. 09. 2021
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.