Date Of Decision: 13.05.2025 vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Anr
2025 Latest Caselaw 784 HP

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Date Of Decision: 13.05.2025 vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Anr on 13 May, 2025

Author: Sandeep Sharma

Bench: Sandeep Sharma

                                                              2025:HHC:13753




IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
                                               CWP No.4297 of 2025
                                       Date of Decision: 13.05.2025
_____________________________________________________________________
Seema Gupta                                             .........Petitioner
                                       Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr.                       .......Respondents

Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?
For the Petitioner:       Mr. Munish Datwalia, Advocate.

For the respondents:     Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan
                         Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar & Mr. B.C. Verma,
                         Additional Advocate Generals, with Mr. Ravi
                         Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for
                         respondents-State.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

Before notices, if any, could be issued to the respondents,

learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, states

that petitioner would be content and satisfied in case her case is

considered and decided in light of judgment rendered by Division

Bench of this Court in CWP No.2004 of 2017 titled as Taj Mohammad

vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, in a time bound

manner.

2. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General,

fairly states that he is not averse to afore innocuous prayer made on

behalf of the petitioner and case of the petitioner shall be considered

and decided expeditiously in accordance with aforesaid judgment.

3. Consequently, in view of the above, 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

case of the petitioner in light of Taj Mohammad (supra),

expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks from today.

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 petitioners and pass appropriate orders thereafter.

Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in

appropriate court of law, if she still remains aggrieved. Pending

applications, if any, stand disposed of.

May 13, 2025                                            (Sandeep Sharma),
       (sunil)                                               Judge