Pawan Kumar v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
The court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous by efflux of time. An order was made regarding the release of any money deposited by respondent No. 5.
What did the court decide?
Petition dismissed as infructuous; order made for release of money deposited by respondent No. 5 if any.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No. 361 of 2012
Date of decision: 1.3.2016
| Pawan Kumar. State of Himachal Pradesh |
…Petitioner Versus & others. …Respondents |
|---|---|
| Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Whether approved for repo |
Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice. Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge. rting?1 |
| For the Petitioner: | Mr. Ajay Sharma, Advocate. |
| For the Respondents: | Mr.Shrawan Dogra, Advocate General with Anup Rattan, Mr.Romesh Verma, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr.J.K. Verma and Mr.Vikram Thakur, Deputy Advocate Generals for respondents No. 1 to 3. |
| Mr.Deepak Kaushal, Advocate, for respondent No. 5. |
Mansoor Ahmad Mir C.J. (Oral).
Mr. Ajay Sharma, Advocate sought adjournment, declined for the
reasons that this writ petition has become infructuous.
- The petitioner has questioned Annexure P-2, Auction Notice, whereby 48 minor mineral quarries in eight Sub Divisions of District Kangra were put to public auction on 30.12.2011 and 31.12.2011. The life of the same was only for three years. Mr. Deepak Kaushal, Advocate has stated that he
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petitioner seeking release of auction deposit and alteration of auction notice.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Pawan Kumar
- respondent
State of Himachal Pradesh
Coram
Mansoor Ahmad Mir
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Himachal Pradesh HC
- Decided on
- · March
- Registered
- Case no.
- CWP/361/2012
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court