Disposed

Chumana Devi v. Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Limited and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC25 May 2017CWP/1067/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Small Cause Writ Petition, the High Court directed the respondent authority to decide the petitioner's pending representation within two weeks, affording a hearing opportunity and requiring reasons if the decision is adverse.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to the 2nd respondent to decide the petitioner's representation dated 20.2.2017 within two weeks.

Chumana Devi Vs Himachal Pradesh State… — Service and Employment | Himachal Pradesh HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No.1067 of 2017

¶3

Date of Decision: 25.5.2017

¶4

Smt. Chumana Devi …Petitioner Versus

¶5

H.P.S.E.B.L. and others

¶6

…Respondents

¶7

_______________________________________________ Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?

¶8

____________________________________________________ For the petitioner : Mr. Inder Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Satyen Vaidya, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vivek Sharma, Advocate, for the respondents.

¶9

Per Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice

¶10

It is seen that petitioner has made a representation dated 20.2.2017 (Annexure P-5) to the 2^nd respondent, bringing out her grievances, which is still pending before the authority concerned.

¶11

Under instructions, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that petitioner shall be content if a direction is issued to the said respondent to decide representation dated 20.2.2017 (Annexure P-5) expeditiously. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent has no objection to the above request.

¶12

No other point is urged.

¶13

¶14

Leaving the questions of law open, a direction is issued to the 2^nd respondent/competent authority to consider and decide the petitioner’s representation dated 20.2.2017 (Annexure P-5), in accordance with law, by affording due opportunity of hearing/representation to the petitioner, within a period of two weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. Petitioner is at liberty to place additional material on record. Needless to add, if the order is not in favour of the petitioner, the authority shall assign reasons while deciding the same, which shall be communicated to the petitioner.

¶15

With these directions, the petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any.

¶16

(Sanjay Karol)

¶17

Acting Chief Justice

¶18

(Sandeep Sharma) Judge

¶19

25^th May, 2017

¶20

Kalpana

¶21

Chumana Devi v. Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Limited and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chumana Devi v. Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Limited and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashok Chauhan Vs State of Hp

Kumari Priyanka Vs State of Hp

Hemant Kumar Vs Hpseb Ltd.

Vikas Chauhan Vs Prabodh Saxena and Others

Pawan Thakur Vs Himachal Pradesh Staff Selection Commission

Yogesh Thakur Vs Hp Staff Selection Commission