MAMTA v. STATE OF HP AND ORS
Court: High Court of Himachal Pradesh
Bench: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE L. NARAYANA SWAMY,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Himachal Pradesh judgment dated 2020-11-23. MAMTA v. STATE OF HP AND ORS. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 4802 of 2020. Date of Decision : November 23, 2020. Mamta ... Petitioner. Versus State of H. P. & others ... Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice L. Narayana Swamy, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Anoop Chitkara, Judge. 1 Whether approved for reporting? No. For the petitioner : Mr. Mohar Singh, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Ashok Sharma, A. G. with Ms. Rita Goswami & Mr. Nand Lal Thakur, Addl. A. Gs for respondents No. 1 to 4. Anoop Chitkara, Judge (oral). The petitioner, who is Pradhan, Mahila Mandal, Bhanalag, H. P. , has come up before this Court seeking quashing of impugned Resolution, Annexure P-1, and also a direction to the respondents to discharge the functions as Pradhan, Mahila Mandal, Bhanalag. 2. Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Advocate General for the respondents-State. 3.
In response to the writ petition, the Sub Divisional Officer (Civil) has filed the written instructions. Paragraph 5 reads as follows: “5. Hence in view of the facts and circumstances as narrated above, following finding: Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? a) The proceeding conducted for the election of Mahila Mandal Body was not done in a proper way and new date for election of Mahila Mandal shall be announced at a sooner date by BDO Office. b) Police Station, Kumarsain have not found any material evidence for the allegation made by the aggrieved party. c) Police report also mentions that aggrieved party has also filed a complaint under Section 3(1)(s) of SC & th ST Act dated 19 September, 2020 for which the proceedings is underway. 4. Given the instructions at 5(a), the writ petition is closed with liberty reserved to the petitioner to approach this Court again, in case need so arises.
The respondents to proceed further in the matter as stated in paragraph 5(a) of the written instructions. Pending application(s), if any, are closed. (L. Narayana Swamy) Chief Justice. (Anoop Chitkara), Judge November 23, 2020 (ps)
Source: High Court of Himachal Pradesh. Archive: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.