Parnika Sharma

Excerpt The Complainant filed a Writ Petition for Mandamus as he was disqualified for not having the documents needed to apply for a job of Himachal Pradesh Police Constable. The Petitioner was not allowed to give an exam meant to test his eligibility for the said job. The Petitioner demanded

Excerpt In the case, the Petitioner prayed for relief for prohibiting the Respondents from conducting construction and causing illegal interference on the suit land. The suit was going on over a dispute for the partition and ownership of the said land. The case was dismissed as the parties already lost

In the present case of Ajay Kumar v State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors., the Petitioner filed for an instant petition to invoke the Writ of Mandamus. He prayed that the Court direct the administration to grant him the reliefs that he has prayed for. Brief Facts  The Petitioner reached

In the present case, Rohit Kumar Rana Versus State of Himachal Pradesh, an FIR was launched against the petitioner under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of the Indian Penal code read with section 34. The petitioner is also charged under Section 66 of the IT Act. Following the FIR, the petitioner

The Petitioner in the present case, Tanishque Uppal v State of Himachal Pradesh, is accused of Theft with other relevant sections of IPC related to theft. He was taken into custody for the same. Subsequently, he filed for a bail petition which was allowed by the Court. The Coram constituted of

In the present case of Karan Thakur vs State of Himachal Pradesh, the petitioner was allegedly accused of caste discrimination due to which an FIR was filed against him by the respondents under Sections 3(1)(S) of ST/SC Act and 341 and 506 of Indian Penal Code. Based on the FIR, the

In the case of Santosh Balyani and Ors. vs State of Himachal Pradesh, the petitioners had allegedly violated and molested the complainant. The complainant filed an FIR for the same upon which the petitioners were arrested and have since been in custody. Subsequently, the petitioners applied for bail, which the Court

In Punu Ram vs The State of Himachal Pradesh and others, the petitioner filed for a writ of mandamus to get relief regarding the regularisation of his services. The court following the previous verdict to regularise the services as Work Inspector gave the decision in petitioner’s favour while rejecting the

In the case, Sumedha Bhatti vs State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors., the Petitioner is a public servant and has filed an instant petition in the court. The Coram consisted of Hon’ble Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Hon’ble Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua. The petition prayed the court to issue writs of Mandamus

The Petitioner in Sh. Rajesh Kumar vs State of Himachal Pradesh was allegedly found with Cannabis. Thereafter, the police arrested him, and an FIR was filed. He was arrested under the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 for the same. Subsequently, the Petitioner prayed for Bail. The Court granted