Allowed

Bablu Kumar v. Union of India

Himachal Pradesh HC26 Oct 2017CWP/2407/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought direction to the competent authority to decide his representation within two weeks after affording hearing to all concerned. Court disposed of the petition issuing directions to the authority.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No. 4/competent authority to consider and decide petitioner's representation within two weeks, affording opportunity of hearing to all concerned.

Bablu Kumar Vs Union of India — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Himachal Pradesh HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No. 2407 of 2017 Date of decision: 26.10.2017

¶3

Bablu Kumar …...Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The Union of India and others ……. Respondents

¶6

Coram:

¶7

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

¶8

Whether approved for reporting?

¶9

For the petitioner: Ms. Soma Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Ashok Sharma, Assistant Solicitor General of India with Ms. Sukarma Sharma, Advocate, for the Union of India.

¶10

Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice (oral)

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner shall be content if a direction is issued to respondent No. 4 to consider and decide the petitioner’s representation (Annexure P4/P6), which he has already made before the competent authority.

¶12

Learned counsel for the respondents/Union of India

¶13

has no objection to the same.

¶14

No other point is urged.

¶15

Leaving all questions of law open, on this short ground, as prayed for, petition is disposed of with a direction to respondentNo.4/competent authority to consider and decide the petitioner ’ s representation, in accordance with law, by affording

¶16

¶17

opportunity of hearing to all concerned, within a period of two weeks from today.

¶18

Till such representation is decided, status quo as on date and time shall be maintained by the parties.

¶19

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. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach the Court, if need so arises subsequently.

¶20

Learned counsel for the respondents/Union of India undertakes to communicate the order to the respondents telephonically.

¶21

With the aforesaid observations, present petition stands disposed of, so also pending application(s), if any. Copy dasti.

¶22

(Sanjay Karol) Acting Chief Justice

¶23

October 26, 2017.

¶24

(cm Thakur)

¶25

(Sandeep Sharma) Judge

Bablu Kumar v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bablu Kumar v. Union of India

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

Whispering Pines Resorts Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India

Ms Ram Krishan Saini and Company Vs Tarun Shridhar

Court on Its Own Motion Vs State of Hp

Puran Chand Vs State of Hp

Karam Dass Vs State of Hp

State of Hp Vs Daulat Ram