NATHU (SINCE DECEASED THROUGH LTsRAM KRISHAN AND ANOTHER(Not Applicable) vs THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS(Not Applicable) — CWP/8323/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Next hearing: : -.

Next hearing —

CNR: HPHC010355562025

Filing Number

CWP/30128/2025

Filing Date

20-Jun-2025

Registration No

CWP/8323/2026

Registration Date

22-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

Last updated 04-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.NATHU (SINCE DECEASED THROUGH LTsRAM KRISHAN AND ANOTHER(Not Applicable)

    Adv. Yuyutsu Singh Thakur,Shardul Thakur,Shardul Thakur, ,Prashant Sharma,Shardul Thakur

  2. 2.Nikku(Not Applicable)

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS(Not Applicable)

    Adv. AG 1123

  2. 2.Financial Commissioner -cum- Secretary(Not Applicable)

  3. 3.The District Collector(Not Applicable)

  4. 4.The Secretary,(Not Applicable)

  5. 5.The Superintending Engineer,(Not Applicable)

Case History

  1. —

    Next hearingPending

  2. 02-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal DuaView PDF

    Case Summary: CWP No. 8323/2026 Nathu & Anr. Vs. State of HP & Ors. The petition was adjourned for further proceedings. The court allowed the delay in refiling (CMP 12127/2026) and directed the petitioners to file a written statement on record and provide translated copies of documents before the next hearing. The respondents were given four weeks to file their reply. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 02-Jun-2026

    Office Objection

    Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

  4. 20-Jun-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/8323/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CWP No. 8323/2026 Nathu & Anr. Vs. State of HP & Ors. The petition was adjourned for further proceedings. The court allowed the delay in refiling (CMP 12127/2026) and directed the petitioners to file a written statement on record and provide translated copies of documents before the next hearing. The respondents were given four weeks to file their reply. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case