HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. COPC…
Contempt proceedings closed; liberty reserved to challenge notification; notices to respondents discharged.
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.
COPC No.136 of 2019 Decided on 10.12.2019
| __________________________________________________________________ Inder Singh ……..Petitioner Versus Shri Jagdish Chand Sharma and Anr. …..Respondents |
|---|
| __________________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 |
| For the petitioner : Mr. Ajay Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Amit Jamwal, Advocate. |
| For the respondents : Mr. Anil Jaswal and Mr. Arvind Sharma, Additional Advocate Generals, for the State. |
| __________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): |
Pursuant to order dated 27.11.2019, learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record notification No.TPT-F(6)-2/965 dated 23.10.2019, perusal whereof clearly reveals that Government of Himachal Pradesh has already published the draft reciprocal agreement proposed to be arrived at between the States of Himachal Pradesh and Punjab in terms of powers conferred by Sub-Section 5 of Section 88 of the Motor Vehicle Act.
2. Though initially vide aforesaid notification, seven days time was granted/ provided to the general public to file objections/suggestions, if any, with regard to the draft reciprocal
1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2
agreement, however subsequently vide corrigendum dated 31.10.2019, it was clarified that seven days as mentioned in notification dated 23.10.2019 may be read as 30 days. Document made available to this Court further reveals that notice as referred above was published in newspaper also. Draft reciprocal agreement between States of Himachal Pradesh and Punjab under Sub-Section 5 of the Section 88 of the MV Act, was also published on 23.10.2019.
3. In view of the aforesaid development, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly states that nothing remains to be adjudicated in the present petition and as such, same may be disposed of. Accordingly, this Court sees no reason to continue with the aforesaid proceedings
4. Consequently, in view of the aforesaid development, present contempt proceedings are closed, however liberty is reserved to the petitioner to lay challenge, if any, to the aforesaid notification, if he still feels aggrieved. Notices issued to respondents are discharged.
(Sandeep Sharma), Judge
10th December, 2019 manjit
Inder Singh
Shri Jagdish Chand Sharma and Anr.
Sandeep Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
