The single judge disposed of a writ petition wherein the petitioner sought direction to the State Government to take steps regarding a recommendation made by Respondent No. 3. The bench granted the relief.
Direction to State Government to take consequent steps without four weeks from today, even if the petitioner's name is in panel.
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. 3592 of 2014.
Date of Decision : 3rd November, 2014. Deepak Kumar …..Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & others …..Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?
For the Petitioner: Mr. Lalit K. Sharma, Advocate. For Respondents No.1 & 2: Mr. Anup Rattan, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Ramesh Thakur, learned Assistant Advocate General. For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Rajkumar Negi, Advocate. _____________________________________________________ Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral)
Mr. Lalit K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the case of the petitioner has been recommended by respondent No.3 to the State Government. The State Government is directed to take consequent steps without four weeks from today, even if, the name of the petitioner is in panel. Petition stands disposed of.
of.
(Rajiv Sharma) Judge. (Sureshwar Thakur) 3rd November, 2014 Judge. (jai)
Deepak Kumar
State of H.P.
Rajiv Sharma
Sureshwar Thakur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
