Disposed
Netar Singh v. State of Hp
Himachal Pradesh HCCWP/738/2014
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP…
What the court decided
AI extract
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP…
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.738 of 2014-D Decided on: 2.5.2014
____________________________________________________________ Netar Singh and others …….Petitioners. Versus State of H.P. and others …Respondents.
____________________________________________________________ Coram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?
______________________________________________________________ For the petitioners: Mr. Jai Dev Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Shrawan Dogra, Advocate General, with Mr. V.S. Chauhan, Mr. M.A. Khan, Addl. Advocate Generals and Mr. Vivek Attri, Mr. Kush Sharma, Deputy Advocate Generals.
____________________________________________________________ Rajiv. Sharma, J (Oral)
Mr. Jai Dev Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioners
submits that the present lis is squarely covered by the judgment dated 13.12.2012, rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in LPA No.105 of 2010, titled as State of H.P.and others versus Rakesh Chand and others alongwith other connected matters.
(Rajiv Sharma) Judge.
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan) Judge.
May 2, 2014 (sks/krt)
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of H.P. and others versus Rakesh Chand and othersReferred¶10
State of H.P. and others versus Rakesh Chand and others
Netar Singh and others
State of H.P. and others
Rajiv Sharma
Tarlok Singh Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court