A single-judge court held that a writ petition has become infructuous due to subsequent developments and dismissed it accordingly, disposing of pending applications.
Writ petition and pending miscellaneous applications dropped.
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 AT SHIMLA
CWP No.5947 of 2023 Decided on: 1st November, 2023
____________________________________________________ Sujan Singh ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & ors. ….Respondents
Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge
1 Whether approved for reporting?
For the petitioner : Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General.
Ranjan Sharma, Judge (Oral)
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that due
to subsequent developments, the instant writ petition has become infructuous.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
(Ranjan Sharma) Judge
November 01, 2023
(shivender)
1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes
Sujan Singh
State of H.P.
Ranjan Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
