Dismissed

Ravinder Kumar Sharma v. State of Hp and Ors.

Himachal Pradesh HC7 Jul 2022CMP-T/308/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Qualifier stated that the impugned office order complied with the Tribunal's mandate in Krishan Chand v. State of HP and Ors. Held that no adjudication remains; application disposed of with liberty to file substantive petition for challenge. Noted lack of substantive adjudication as reason for dismissal.

What did the court decide?

No adjudication remained; liberty reserved to file appropriate challenge in competent court of law.

Ravinder Kumar Sharma Vs State of Hp and Ors. — Service and Employment | Himachal Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

Ravinder Kumar v. State

¶2

CMP-T No. 308 of 2022 in Ex.PT No. 23 of 2022

¶3

7.7.2022

¶4

Present: Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate, for the applicant/petitioner.

¶5

Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar and Mr. Narinder Guleria, Additional Advocates General for the State. Mr. Lakshay Thakur, Advocate, for nonapplicants/respondents No. 3 to 5.

¶6

While placing on record copy of office order dated 6.7.2022, issued under the signature of Executive Director, (Pers.) HPSEBL, Mr. Lakshay Thakur, Advocate, states that order sought to be executed in the instant proceedings stands duly complied with and as such, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the present proceedings.

¶7

Perusal of the aforesaid order, which is taken on record reveals that respondents in compliance of order dated 4.10.2018 passed by the erstwhile Tribunal, have considered case of the petitioner in light of the judgment rendered by the Tribunal in OA No. 1004 of 2015 titled Krishan Chand v. State of HP and Ors , but since petitioner was not found similarly situate to the petitioner in Krishan Chand’s case supra, his case has been rejected.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner vehemently argued that case of the petitioner has not been considered strictly in accordance with the judgment passed by the Tribunal in Krishan Chand’s case supra, however, this court cannot go into the correctness of the consideration order passed in purported compliance of order dated 4.10.2018,

¶9

rather correctness of order passed in purported compliance can only be laid challenge by way of substantive petition before the competent court of law.

¶10

Consequently, in view of the above, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the instant proceedings and accordingly, present application disposed of. However, liberty is reserved to the applicant to file appropriate proceedings before the appropriate court of law, laying therein challenge to the aforesaid consideration order passed by the respondents.

¶11

7^th July, 2022 (Sandeep Sharma), Manjit Judge

Ravinder Kumar Sharma v. State of Hp and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravinder Kumar Sharma v. State of Hp and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nikhil Kumar Vs State of Hp

Oic Vs Mst Mahtaba

Oic Vs Mst Mahtaba

State of Hp Vs Arun Rana

Mehar Chand Vs State of Hp

Gareeb Ram Vs Sandeep Kumar and Anr.