DUNI CHAND(Not Applicable) vs STATE OF HP(Not Applicable) — CWP/3376/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 23rd March 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HPHC010102122026

Filing Number

CWP/8645/2026

Filing Date

09-Mar-2026

Registration No

CWP/3376/2026

Registration Date

19-Mar-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel

Bench Type

Single

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Decision Date

23-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 26-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.DUNI CHAND(Not Applicable)

    Adv. Ashwani Gupta,Abhendra Gupta,Abhendra Gupta, ,Abhendra Gupta

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HP(Not Applicable)

    Adv. AG 1123

  2. 2.The Engineer-in-Chief, I and PH(Not Applicable)

  3. 3.The Superintending Engineer, I and PH(Not Applicable)

  4. 4.The Executive Engineer, I and PH(Not Applicable)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 23-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan GoelView PDF

    Summary of CWP No. 3376/2026 The High Court of Himachal Pradesh dismissed the petition on the ground that the petitioner approached the court directly without first exhausting the administrative remedy of approaching the competent authority. The court directed the petitioner to file a separate representation with the competent authority within four weeks, which must be decided in accordance with law within twelve weeks thereafter, with a speaking order. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 23-Mar-2026

    Notice Before Admission

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel

  4. 09-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/3376/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of CWP No. 3376/2026 The High Court of Himachal Pradesh dismissed the petition on the ground that the petitioner approached the court directly without first exhausting the administrative remedy of approaching the competent authority. The court directed the petitioner to file a separate representation with the competent authority within four weeks, which must be decided in accordance with law within twelve weeks thereafter, with a speaking order. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case