The petitioner's writ petition rendered infructuous; ordered accordingly as no further hearing required.
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
Ex. Petition No. 74 of 2021 Decided on: 23rd December, 2022
_____________________________________________________ Rajinder Kumar
…..Petitioner
Versus State of H.P. & Ors
…..Respondents
_____________________________________________________ Coram_
The Hon'ble Ms. Justice Sabina, Judge The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge
1 Whether approved for reporting?
_____________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Ms. Babita Chauhan, Advocate on behalf of Mr. A.K. Gupta, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anil Jaswal, Additional Advocate General, Advocate.
Sabina, Judge (Oral)
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
this petition has been rendered infructuous.
Ordered accordingly.
1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed
of.
(Sabina) Judge
(Sushil Kukreja ) Judge
December 23, 2022 (himani)
Rajinder Kumar
State of H.P.
Sabina
Sushil Kukreja
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
