Disposed

Tehsil Baddi Jan Kalyan Sabha v. State of Hp

Himachal Pradesh HC25 Oct 2017CWP/2383/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This was a civil writ petition where the petitioner, without pressing the matter on merits, sought a direction for the respondent to decide a pending representation within eight weeks. The court granted this direction on a consensus basis.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to consider and decide petitioner's representation dated 10th August 2017 (Annexure P-3) within eight weeks, affording due opportunity of hearing.

Tehsil Baddi Jan Kalyan Sabha… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Himachal Pradesh HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶3

CWP No. 2383 of 2017

¶4

Date of decision: 25^th October, 2017 Tehsil Baddi, Jan Kalyan Sabha Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of H.P. and others Respondents ______________________________________________________ Coram:

¶7

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice

¶8

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge Whether approved for reporting¹ :

¶9

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ajay Thakur, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. Shrawan Dogra, Advocate General, with Mr. Romesh Verma, Additional Advocate General, for the State.

¶10

______________________________________________________ Per Sanjay Karol, ACJ (Oral)

¶11

It is seen that petitioner has made a representation dated 10^th August, 2017 (Annexure P-3) to the respondents, bringing out his grievances, which is still pending before the authority concerned.

¶12

Without pressing the petition on merits, learned counsel for the petitioner, under instructions, states that petitioner shall be content if a direction is issued to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide his representation, dated 10^th August, 2017 (Annexure P-3) within a time bound period. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection to the above request.

¶13

No other point is urged.

¶14

Leaving the questions of law open, a direction is issued to the respondents to consider and decide the petitioner’s

¶15

1 Whether Reporters of local newspaper are permitted to see the judgment ?

¶16

¶17

representation, dated 10^th August, 2017 (Annexure P-3), in accordance with law, by affording due opportunity of hearing/representation to the petitioner, within a period of eight 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 authorities shall 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.

¶18

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

¶19

Copy dasti.

Tehsil Baddi Jan Kalyan Sabha v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tehsil Baddi Jan Kalyan Sabha v. State of Hp

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

Mahender Singh Vs State

Sunder Nagar Integrated Rural Development Association Naulkha Vs All India Council of Technical Education (Aicte)

Darshan Dass Vs State

Vidya Stokes Vs Election Commission of India

Whispering Pines Resorts Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India

Ms Ram Krishan Saini and Company Vs Tarun Shridhar