COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. COPC No.…
Contempt petition dismissed as infructuous; notice discharged.
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. 575 of 2012. Decided on: May 1, 2013.
| Virender Kumar | …Petitioner. |
|---|---|
| Versus | |
| Bharti S. Sihag & Ors. | … Respondents. |
Coram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Judge.
| Whether approved for r | eporting?1 |
|---|---|
| For the petitioner. | : Ms. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Advocate |
| For the respondent. | : Mr. B.S. Parmar and Mr. V.S. Chauhan, Addl. A.Gs., Mr. Kush Sharma & Mr. Vikram Thakur, Dy. A.Gs. for respondent-State. |
| Mr. D.K. Khanna, Advocate for HP Public Service Commission, Shimla |
|
| Mr. Tarlok Chauhan, Advocate for Beas Valley Power Corporation Ltd. |
Dev Darshan Sud, J. (Oral):
When this petition was taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the parties submit that the compliance report meets the grievance of the petitioner. In these circumstances, the contempt petition is dismissed being infructuous. Notice discharged.
1 Whether the reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
Virender Kumar
Bharti S. Sihag
Dev Darshan Sud
Dharam Chand Chaudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
