PRADEEP SHARMA AND OTHERS v. STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER
Court: High Court of Himachal Pradesh
Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Himachal Pradesh judgment dated 2024-12-19. PRADEEP SHARMA AND OTHERS v. STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER. Read the judgment and case details on...
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 13838, 13839, 13842, 13843, 13844 and 13846 of 2024 Decided on: 19. 12. 2024 CWP No. 13838 of 2024 Vivek Thakur and others … Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another … Respondents CWP No. 13839 of 2024 Sh. Shyam Lal and another … Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another … Respondents CWP No. 13842 of 2024 Kewal Ram Kalta … Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others … Respondents CWP No. 13843 of 2024 Smt. Jyotsna Negi … Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another … Respondents CWP No. 13844 of 2024 Smt. Nav Pallavi … Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another … Respondents CWP No. 13846 of 2024 Sh. Pradeep Sharma and others … Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. 1 Whether approved for reporting? _____________________________________________________ For the petitioner(s) : Mr.
Vaibhav Tanwar Advocate, for the petitioner(s) in all the petitions. For the respondents : Mr. Pushpender Jaswal, Additional Advocate General in all the petitions. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) Notice. Mr. Pushpender Jaswal, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner(s) submits that the prayer made herein is squarely covered by the judgment passed by Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 2004 of 2017 alongwith connected matters, titled Taj Mohammad and others vs. State of H. P. and others, decided on 03. 08. 2023. He further submits that representations (Annexure P-3 colly.
) has also been made by the petitioners in this regard and it would be in the interest of justice, in case, these petitions are disposed of with the direction that let the representations of the petitioners be decided by the Competent Authority, in terms of the averments made in the representations as well as the judgments being relied upon by the petitioners therein. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 3. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, these petitions are disposed of with the direction that let the representations (Annexure P-3 colly. ) made by the petitioners shall be decided by the Competent Authority, in terms of the averments made therein, taking into consideration the judgments being relied upon by the petitioners therein, by passing a speaking order, within a period of eight weeks from today. 4. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.
(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge December 19, 2024 (narender)
Source: High Court of Himachal Pradesh. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.