In CWP No. 474 of 2022, the High Court of Himachal Pradesh dismissed a petition as not pressed by the learned counsel, without engaging substantive legal issues.
Petition dismissed as not pressed.
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, SHIMLA
CWP No. 474 of 2022
Decided on: 06.07.2023
Amar Nath. .…Petitioner.
| Versus | ||
|---|---|---|
| State of H.P. and ors. | …Respondents. | |
| Coram |
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
| For the petitioner | : | Mr. Rajesh |
Kumar, Advocate. |
|---|---|---|---|
| For the respondents | : | Mr. Anup | Rattan, Advocate |
| General | with Mr. I.N. | ||
| Mehta, Se | nior Additional | ||
| Advocate | General, Mr. | ||
| Ramakant | Sharma, Ms. | ||
| Sharmila | Patial, Additional | ||
| Advocate | Generals, Ms. | ||
| Priyanka | Chauhan and | ||
| Mr. Rajat Officer. |
Chauhan, Law | ||
| : | Mr. U |
mesh Kanwar, | |
| Advocate, No.3. |
for respondent | ||
| Tarlok Singh Chauh | an, | Judge(Ora | l) |
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that
he is under instructions not to press this petition. His
statement is taken on record.
1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2
as not pressed, so also the pending application(s), if any.
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan) Judge
(Satyen Vaidya) Judge
6th July, 2023
(sushma)
Amar Nath
State of H.P. and ors.
Tarlok Singh Chauhan
Satyen Vaidya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
