The single judge disposed of the writ petition as infructuous following a reply by the respondents that addressed the petitioner's contentions regarding the Panchayat Ghar construction.
Petition disposed as infructuous based on respondents' reply; pending applications also disposed.
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
CWP No.2720 of 2022 Decided on:06.12.2022
Ravinder Kumar ……Petitioner
Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others …Respondents _________________________________________________ Coram:
Hon’ble Ms. Justice Sabina, Judge. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner : Mr. G.D. Verma, Senior Advocate with Mr. B.C. Verma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Vikrant Chandel, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 4. Mr. L.S. Mehta, Advocate, for respondent No.5. ________________________________________________
Sabina, Judge (Oral).
Petitioner has filed the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief(s):-
2
3
the resolutions of Gram Sabha and all other factors which serve larger public interest for progress, development and welfare of the people. Until the decision regarding fixing construction site is taken, Panchayat would keep on functioning from temporary rent-free private building at place Dhar for which department has given permission vide letter no.41144 dated 18th June 2021.
11. xxx xxx xxx
12. That the contents of para no.12 of the petition are admitted to the extent that Department of Panchayati Raj vide its letter No.71358-360 directed all Executive Engineers that construction of Panchayat buildings is to be undertaken where all codal formalities are completed and funds have been sanctioned to concerned District Panchayat Officers, annexed as Annexure R-VII. Subsequently Executive Engineer issued online tender but District Panchayat Officer had never sanctioned any fund to Executive Engineer and thus the Executive Engineer withdrew the tender later on. Copy of the notice of withdrawal
4
of tender is enclosed as Annexure R-VIII. Therefore, so far, no fund has been released for the construction of Panchayat Ghar Kotaseri. Rest of the para is wrong and hence denied.”
petition has been rendered infructuous and the same is disposed of accordingly.
( Sabina ) Judge
( Sushil Kukreja ) December 06, 2022 Judge (Yashwant)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ravinder Kumar
State of Himachal Pradesh
Sabina
Sushil Kukreja
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
