Disposed

Dev Prasad v. State of Hp and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC7 Mar 2023CWP/906/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Himachal Pradesh directed the respondent authorities to examine the petitioner's grievance and issue a bona fide resident certificate or pass a speaking order within one month, relying on a prior precedent regarding 20-year residency.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.3 to examine the petitioner's grievance and issue a bona fide resident certificate or pass a speaking order within one month.

Dev Prasad Vs State of Hp and Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Himachal Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.

¶2

CWP No. 906 of 2023 Decided on: 07.03.2023 Dev Prasad …Petitioner Versus State of H. P. & Ors. …Respondents

¶3

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge.

¶4

Whether approved for reporting?¹^No.

¶5

For the Petitioner : Mr. Bonit Thakur, Advocate, vice Mr. A. K. Gupta, Advocate.

¶6

For the Respondents : Mr. Anup Rattan, A.G. with Mr. I. N. Mehta, Mr. Y. W. Chauhan, Sr. Addl. A.G., Mr. J. S. Guleria, Dy. A.G. and Mr. Rajat Chauhan, Law Officer.

¶7

Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge (Oral)

¶8

This petition has been filed by the petitioner (Dev Prasad), inter alia , with the prayer that the respondents may be directed to issue bonafide certificate in his favour with immediate effect. The contention of the petitioner is that he is a permanent resident of Village and P. O. Manali, Tehsil Manali, District Kullu, H.P. and that he has been residing at the present place for last more than 20 years. Reliance has been placed on the judgment dated 13.10.2020, passed by Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.3517 of 2020, titled Ashwani Kumar &

¶9

others vs. The State of Himachal Pradesh & others ,

¶10

1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes

¶11

¶12

wherein this Court, on the analysis of the law on the subject, held that a person residing in the State of Himachal Pradesh for a period of 20 years or more would be entitled to be treated as bonafide resident of the State. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner would be satisfied if his case is considered by the respondents-authorities.

¶13

Having regard to the above submissions, we dispose of this writ petition by directing respondent No.3 to examine the grievance of the petitioner in the light of the aforesaid judgment for issuance of bonafide resident certificate or otherwise by a speaking order within a period of one month from the date of production of a copy of this order.

¶14

Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

¶15

(Tarlok Singh Chauhan) Judge

¶16

(Virender Singh)

¶17

7^th March, 2023 Judge

¶18

(sanjeev)

Dev Prasad v. State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dev Prasad 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

Shyam Singh Vs State of Hp and Others

Dharat Singh Vs State of Hp and Others

Pankaj Kumar Vs State of Hp and Others

Naveen Kumar Vs State of Hp and Another

Pema Dolma Vs State of Hp and Others

Kanchha Vs State of Hp and Others