2026:HHC:23762 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.6576 of 2026 Date of decision: 22.06.2026 Gopal Sharma. ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. …Respondents. Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : None. For the respondent(s) : Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1, 2 & 4-State. : Mr. Surinder K. Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.3. Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge On previous date, i.e. on 11.05.2026, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner, however in the interest of justice matter was adjourned for today. 2. Today again, despite calling the matter repeatedly in pre-lunch and post-lunch sessions, no one has come forward to represent the petitioner. 1WhetherthereportersofthelocalpapersmaybeallowedtoseetheJudgment?Yes -2- 3. In view of above, petition is dismissed in default for want of prosecution. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of in the same terms. (Vivek Singh Thakur) Judge (Ranjan Sharma) Judge 22nd June, 2026 (Pardeep)

2026:HHC:23762 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.6576 of 2026 Date of decision: 22.06.2026 Gopal Sharma. ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. …Respondents. Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : None. For the respondent(s) : Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1, 2 & 4-State. : Mr. Surinder K. Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.3. Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge On previous date, i.e. on 11.05.2026, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner, however in the interest of justice matter was adjourned for today. 2. Today again, despite calling the matter repeatedly in pre-lunch and post-lunch sessions, no one has come forward to represent the petitioner. 1WhetherthereportersofthelocalpapersmaybeallowedtoseetheJudgment?Yes -2- 3. In view of above, petition is dismissed in default for want of prosecution. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of in the same terms. (Vivek Singh Thakur) Judge (Ranjan Sharma) Judge 22nd June, 2026 (Pardeep)