The Court found the petitioner's CWP infructuous on the submission of counsel and dismissed the petition, also disposing of a pending miscellaneous application.
The writ petition was dismissed and a pending miscellaneous application was disposed of.
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 AT SHIMLA
CWP No.218 of 2019 Decided on: 8th March, 2021
__________________________________________________________________ M/s Suvidha Sanitation
....Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and others
……Respondents
_________________________________________________________________ Coram_
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ravi Malimath, Judge Hon’ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
1 Whether approved for reporting?
______________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Ms. Seema K. Guleria, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Ajay Vaidya, Senior Additional Advocate General.
Ravi Malimath, Judge. (Oral)
Petitioner’s counsel submits that the writ
petition has become infructuous and may be
dismissed.
1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
accordingly.
( Ravi Malimath )
Judge
( Jyotsna Rewal Dua ) Judge
March 08, 2021
(TM/ V.Himalvi)
M/s Suvidha Sanitation
State of Himachal Pradesh
Ravi Malimath
Jyotsna Rewal Dua
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
