Petitioner withdrew the present petition on condition that he could approach respondents to cover his case under specific precedents with a mandatory eight-week timeline for merits-based consideration.
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
CWP No.1789 of 2014-I
Date of decision : 2.4.2014
Dr. Ashok Kumar … Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and another … Respondents
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge.
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No.
For the Petitioner : Mr. T.S. Chauhan, Advocate.
For the Respondents : Mr. Shrawan Dogra, A.G. with Mr. B.S. Parmar, Mr. Ashok Chaudhary, Mr. Anup Rattan, Addl. A.Gs and Mr. Vikram Thakur, Dy. A.G.
Sanjay Karol, Judge (Oral)
Learned counsel for the petitioner, under instructions, does not press the present petition and submits that petitioner shall approach the respondents clearly bringing out the circumstances under which his case is covered by the decisions rendered by this Court in LPA No.36 of 2012 , titled as Sita Ram versus State of Himachal Pradesh , on 15.7.2010, as also Dr. Ram Chander vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and another , on 11.1.2013.
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
…2…
With the aforesaid observations, present petition stands disposed of as not pressed, so also, the pending application(s), if any.
(Sanjay Karol), Judge.
(Dharam Chand Chaudhary), April 2, 2014 (KS) Judge.
Dr. Ashok Kumar
State of Himachal Pradesh
another
Sanjay Karol
Dharam Chand Chaudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
