In thisDismissal, the single-judge bench held that the respondents' action of dispending with the petitioner's services was held to be based on his own expression of unwillingness. The court observed that no fault could be found with the action and consequently dismissed the petition.
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.1170 of 2012-G.
Date of decision: 08.05.2015.
Hem Raj …..Petitioner.
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and another …..Respondents.
Coram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the Petitioner : Mr.Neel Kamal Sood, Advocate.
For the Respondents : Mr.Virender Kumar Verma, Ms.Meenakshi Sharma and Mr.Rupinder Singh, Additional Advocate Generals.
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J. (Oral) .
The petitioner has sought the following relief:-
Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?Yes
2
May 08, 2015. (Tarlok Singh Chauhan), (krt) Judge.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's services were dispensed with to his express unwillingness to continue.
Whether the petition for quashing of orders and re-engagement of the petitioner should be allowed.
Hem Raj
State of Himachal Pradesh
Tarlok Singh Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
