Sohan Lal vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 3375 HP

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Sohan Lal vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Ors on 5 August, 2025

Author: Sandeep Sharma

Bench: Sandeep Sharma

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
                                                  CWP No.12421 of 2025
                                           Date of Decision: 05.08.2025
    _____________________________________________________________________




                                                               .
    Sohan Lal                                                   .........Petitioner





                                           Versus
    State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.                           .......Respondents
    Coram





    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
    Whether approved for reporting?
    For the Petitioner:       Mr. Raj Thakur, Advocate.
    For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan





                         Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar & Mr. B.C. Verma,
                         Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi
                         Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General.
    ___________________________________________________________________________

    Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

Before reply, if any, from the respondents could be

received, learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions,

states that petitioner would be content and satisfied in case his

representation is considered and decided in the light of judgment

passed by Division Bench this Court in CWPOA No. 5536 of 2020 titled

Sanjay Kumar Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. alongwith

connected matters.

2. While putting in appearance on behalf of respondents, Mr.

Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General, fairly states that

representation, if any, filed by the petitioner shall be considered and

decided expeditiously.

3. Consequently, in view of the aforesaid fair stand adopted

by learned Additional Advocate General, coupled with the fact that

petitioner has already filed representation for redressal of his

.

grievance (Annexure P-2), 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 in light of judgment passed by this Court in Sanjay Kumar

(supra), expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks. 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.

    August 05, 2025                                     (Sandeep Sharma),
         (sunil)                                             Judge