Remanded

Uma Kumari and Others v. State of Hp and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC15 Jun 2023CWP/3859/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A two-judge Bench dismissed the present review petition after noting that the matter is covered by a prior Division Bench decision. It directed the respondent-State to decide the petitioners' case within eight weeks, considering whether any are fence-sitters.

What did the court decide?

Directed the respondent-State to consider and decide the petitioners' case within eight weeks in light of LPA No. 102/2010 and CWPOA No. 863/2019.

Uma Kumari and Others Vs State of Hp and… — Service and Employment | Himachal Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No.3859 of 2023.

¶3

Date of decision: 15.06.2023.

¶4

Uma Kumari and others …..Petitioners.

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of H.P. and others …..Respondents.

¶7

Coram

¶8

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge.

¶9

Whether approved for reporting?¹ No

¶10

For the Petitioners : Mr. R.L. Chaudhary, Advocate.

¶11

For the Respondents : Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. I.N. Mehta, Senior Additional Advocate General, Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Ms. Sharmila Patial, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Rajat Chauhan, Law Officer.

¶12

Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge (Oral)

¶13

Notice. Ms. Sharmila Patial, learned Additional

¶14

Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the issue in question is squarely covered by the judgment dated 13.1.2012

¶16

rendered by the learned Division Bench of this Court in LPA No. 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?Yes

¶17

¶18

102/2010, titled as Dr. Lekh Raj Sharma & ors. vs. State of H.P. & anr ., which, in turn, has been followed by the learned single Judge of this Court in CWPOA No. 863/2019, titled as Ashok Kumar Sharma & anr. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. , decided on 16.7.2020. This is a matter, which is required to be examined and considered by the respondent-State.

¶19

Accordingly, without going into the merits of this case, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this petition with a direction to the respondent-State to consider and decide the case of the petitioners, in light of the aforesaid judgments within a period of eight weeks. Ordered accordingly. However, while doing so, it shall always be open for the respondent-State to consider whether the petitioners or any one of them are fence-sitters and the effect thereof on their respective claim, as raised in this petition. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

¶20

(Tarlok Singh Chauhan) Judge

¶21

15^th June, 2023. ( krt )

¶22

(Satyen Vaidya) Judge

Uma Kumari and Others v. State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uma Kumari and Others v. State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jaiwant Sharma Vs State of Hp and Others

Desh Raj Vs Hrtc and Anr.

Cskhpkv Vs Rajinder Kumar

M/S Renny Steels and Another Vs Reserve Bank of India and Others

Rupesh Rekha Vs State of Hp and Others

Sandhira Nepta Vs State of Hp