The petitioner sought to join based on Annexure R-2. The High Court found the condition satisfied, deemed the writ petition infructuous, and dismissed it alongwith pending applications.
Writ petition dismissed as infructuous alongwith all pending applications.
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.2508 of 2014
Date of decision: 08.12.2014
Dr. Ved Parkash Patial.
…..Petitioner
Versus
H.P. Technical University and others.
….. Respondents
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge
Whether approved for reporting?
For the petitioner: Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Surinder Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr. Shrawan Dogra, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Anup Rattan, Mr. Romesh Verma, Additional Advocates General and Mr. J.K. Verma, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.2 and 3.
Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice (oral)
Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, learned counsel for the petitioner, stated at the Bar that in terms of Annexure R-2, the petitioner has now been allowed to join, rendering the writ petition as infructuous. His Statement is taken on record.
( Mansoor Ahmad Mir ) Chief Justice December 08, 2014 ( Tarlok Singh Chauhan ) (rkv) Judge
Dr. Ved Parkash Patial
H.P. Technical University
Mansoor Ahmad Mir
Tarlok Singh Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
