Petitioner challenged implementation of a prior judgment. Court found the earlier order in CWP(T) No. 3603 of 2010 was fully implemented, rendering the present petition infructuous and dismissed it.
Present petition rendered infructuous and dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
COPC No. 170 of 2010 Decided on: 01.11.2010
Mehar Chand
…Petitioner
Versus
O.P. Sharma
…Respondent.
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 .
For the petitioner : Mr. Shashi Shirshoo, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General with Mr.R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General.
Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral) :
Mr. P.M. Negi, learned Deputy Advocate General has placed on record a copy of letter dated 29th October, 2010. A bare perusal of this letter reveals that the judgment in question rendered in CWP(T) No. 3603 of 2010 on 4.3.2010 has been implemented in letter and spirit.
(Rajiv Sharma), Judge
November 1, 2010
(K. Attri)
1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
Mehar Chand
O.P. Sharma
Rajiv Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
