Disposed

Beli Ram v. State of Hp and Another

Himachal Pradesh HC14 Jun 2017CWP/1270/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought direction to the authority to consider his case under a specific dated policy. The court directed the authority to decide the matter within four weeks and reserved liberty to the petitioner to approach the court subsequently if not satisfied.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to respondents to consider and decide petitioner's case in light of policy dated 1.8.2012 within four weeks without taking coercive action.

Beli Ram Vs State of Hp and Another — Service and Employment | Himachal Pradesh HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No. 1270 of 2017 Date of Decision: 14.06.2017

¶3

Beli Ram …..Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and Anr. ....Respondents. Coram: 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. B.C. Negi, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Raj Negi, Advocate.

¶4

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.

¶5

Sanjay Karol, ACJ. (oral)

¶6

Without pressing the petition on merits, learned counsel for the petitioner, under instructions, submits that petitioner shall be content if direction is issued to the respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the petitioner’s case in light of policy dated 1.8.2012 (Annexure P-7). Mr. J.K. Verma, learned Deputy Advocate General, has no objection to the above request.

¶7

No other point is urged.

¶8

Leaving all questions of law open, as orally prayed for, we dispose of the writ petition reserving liberty to the

¶9

1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶10

…2…

¶11

petitioner to positively approach the respondents-authorities within a period of two weeks from today. Upon receipt of such request, the respondent-authorities shall consider and decide the petitioner’s case in the light of Annexure P-7, within a period of four weeks thereafter. Till then, no coercive action will be taken. 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 pass assign reasons while deciding the same, which shall be communicated to the petitioner. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach the Court, if need so arises subsequently.

¶12

Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. Copy dasti .

¶13

( Sanjay Karol), Acting Chief Justice 14^th June, 2017 ( Sandeep Sharma ), Manjit Judge.

Beli Ram v. State of Hp and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Beli Ram v. State of Hp and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kuldeep Singh Pathania Vs State of Hp

Surender Pal Vs Himachal Pradesh Power Corporation

The State of H.P. Vs Shiv Raj Sigh

State of Hp Vs Sita Ram

Ms Hi-Tech Industries Vs State of Hp

Sunil Kumar and Others Vs State of Hp and Others