Allowed

Gulabo Devi v. State of Hp and Ors.

Himachal Pradesh HC6 Aug 2020CWP/2729/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner, a former Gram Panchayat President, sought inspection of documents used in an inquiry against her. The Court disposed of the petition by directing the State to supply requisite documents within ten days.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent-State to supply all requisite documents to the petitioner within ten days of the order.

Gulabo Devi Vs State of Hp and Ors. — Service and Employment | Himachal Pradesh HC (2020)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶3

CWP No. 2729 of 2020. Date of Decision : August 06, 2020.

¶4

Gulabo Devi ...Petitioner.

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of H.P. & Others Coram:

¶7

...Respondents.

¶8

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice L. Narayana Swamy, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Anoop Chitkara, Judge.

¶9

Whether approved for reporting?¹ No.

¶10

For the petitioner : Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Ashok Sharma, A.G. with Mr. Adarsh Sharma & Ms. Rita Goswami, Addl. A.Gs., for respondents No.1 to 6. Mr. Vikrant Thakur, Advocate for respondent No.8.

¶11

COURT PROCEEDINGS CONVENED THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE

¶12

Anoop Chitkara, Judge . (Oral)

¶13

The petitioner, who was elected as President of Gram Panchayat, Bharara, District Chamba, in the year 2015, has come up before this Court seeking supply of documents relied upon in the inquiry conducted against her by the Panchayat Inspector. 2. Notice. Mr. Adarsh Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General appears and accepts service of notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 6 and Mr. Vikrant Thakur, Advocate on behalf of respondent No.8.

¶14

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶15

Learned Additional Advocate General submits that this writ petition can be disposed of with a direction to the respondent-State to supply all necessary documents to the petitioner within ten days.

¶16

In view of the nature of the order, we propose to pass, no response is required from the respondents.

¶17

Consequently, we disposed of this writ petition with a direction to the respondent-State to supply all requisite documents to the petitioner within ten days. After receipt of such documents, the petitioner may file her reply within thirty days in the concerned inquiry.

¶18

With the above observations, the writ petition is closed, so also the pending application(s), if any.

¶19

(L. Narayana Swamy) Chief Justice.

¶20

(Anoop Chitkara), Judge

¶21

August 06, 2020 (ps)

Gulabo Devi v. State of Hp and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gulabo Devi v. State of Hp and Ors.

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

Nand Lal Vs Hp Tourism Development Corporation Ltd. and Anr.

Keshav Dev Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Umesh Sood Vs State of Hp and Others

Akanksha Gautam Vs State of Hp and Others

Usha Thakur Vs State

Mohinder Kumar Vs State of Hp and Ors.