VINOD ARORA(Not Applicable) vs STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER(Not Applicable) — CWP/6997/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 07th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HPHC010275722026

Filing Number

CWP/24004/2026

Filing Date

05-May-2026

Registration No

CWP/6997/2026

Registration Date

06-May-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Coram

Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Bench Type

Single

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Decision Date

07-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 02-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.VINOD ARORA(Not Applicable)

    Adv. Ruma Kaushik,Udit Shaurya Kaushik,Udit Shaurya Kaushik, ,Udit Shaurya Kaushik

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER(Not Applicable)

    Adv. ,Pawanish Kumar Shukla,AG 1123

  2. 2.The Municipal Corporation Mandi(Not Applicable)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 07-May-2026

    Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal DuaView PDF

    Case Summary: CWP 6997/2026 Vinod Arora filed a writ petition against the State of H.P. and Municipal Corporation Mandi seeking mandamus to prevent eviction/demolition of his shop (No. 53, Jail Road, Mandi) and requesting reasons for such action with opportunity to be heard. However, during hearing, respondents conceded that no action had yet been taken against the petitioner. The High Court of Himachal Pradesh allowed the petition to be withdrawn with liberty to approach appropriate remedy if needed in future. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 07-May-2026

    Notice Before Admission

    Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

  4. 05-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/6997/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CWP 6997/2026 Vinod Arora filed a writ petition against the State of H.P. and Municipal Corporation Mandi seeking mandamus to prevent eviction/demolition of his shop (No. 53, Jail Road, Mandi) and requesting reasons for such action with opportunity to be heard. However, during hearing, respondents conceded that no action had yet been taken against the petitioner. The High Court of Himachal Pradesh allowed the petition to be withdrawn with liberty to approach appropriate remedy if needed in future. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case