This is a reported order on CWP No. 1053 of 2017 where the two-judge High Court Bench disposed of the writ petition by directing the authorities to consider the petitioner's representation within a specific timeframe.
Directed authorities to consider petitioner's representation within two months and assign reasons if the order is unfavorable.
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. 1053 of 2017 Date of Decision: 29.06.2017
Pradeep Kumar Sharma …..Petitioner.
Versus
State of H.P. and Ors. Coram:
....Respondents.
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge . Whether approved for reporting?1
For the Petitioner: Mr. Diwan Singh Negi, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Shrawan Dogra, Advocate General with Mr. Anup Rattan & Mr. Romesh Verma, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. J.K. Verma & Mr. Kush Sharma, Deputy Advocate Generals, for respondents No. 1 to 3.
Mr. Gulzar Singh Rathore, Advocate, for respondent No.4.
Sanjay Karol, ACJ. (oral)
Learned counsel for the petitioner, under instructions, submits that petitioner shall be content if a direction is issued to the respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide petitioner’s representation which he shall be making, venting out his grievance to the relevant authorities.
dispose of the writ petition with the following directions:-
1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
…2…
( Sanjay Karol), Acting Chief Justice 29th June, 2017 ( Sandeep Sharma ), Manjit Judge.
Pradeep Kumar Sharma
State of H.P.
Sanjay Karol
Sandeep Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
