Allowed

Ram Singh v. State of Hp

Himachal Pradesh HC1 Aug 2023CWPOA/898/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a civil writ petition, the Court considered whether the relief regarding recovery of amounts from petitioners was covered by the S.S. Chaudhary judgment. The Court held that it was and quashed the relevant recovery orders, allowing the petition on this ground.

What did the court decide?

The recoveries sought to be effected from petitioners via the impugned Office Order-cum Notices are quashed and set aside.

Ram Singh Vs State of Hp — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Himachal Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

CWPOA No. 898 of 2020

¶3

Decided on: 01.08.2023
Ram Singh and Ors. .…Petitioners.
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. …Respondents.
Coram

¶4

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge.

¶5

Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶6

For the petitioners	: Mr. Onkar Jairath, Advocate.
For the respondents	: Mr. Pushpender Jaswal, Mr. Rahul Thakur and Ms. Priyanka Chauhan, Deputy Advocate Generals.

¶7

Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral)

¶8

The instant petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive relief:-

¶9

i) That impugned notification/ order dated 26.07.2016 ( Annexure A-4) and Office Order–cum Notices dated 07.12.2016 ( Annexure A-5 ) Colly ) may kindly be quashed and set aside and the respondents ma be further directed to not to effect recovery from the applicants.

¶10

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

¶11

¶12

Learned Deputy Advocate General has placed on record instructions issued by Director of Elementary Education, H.P., according to which, the relief with respect to effecting the recoveries from petitioners is covered by the judgment passed by Division Bench of this Court in S. S. Chaudhary Vs. State of H.P. (2020) 2 Himachal Law Reporter 954.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that in view of the stand taken by the respondents, his clients will be contended in case the relief with respect to the recovery of amount, as prayed in the instant petition, is granted. He has further submitted that for rest of the relief(s), the petitioners shall be availing appropriate remedy in accordance with law, if so advised.

¶14

Keeping in view the respective stands as taken by the parties, as also from perusal of the contents of petition, relief with respect to the recovery of amount from the petitioners is covered by the judgment passed by Division Bench of this Court in S.S. Chaudhary’s case (supra). Accordingly, petitioners are also held entitled to the same relief. The recoveries sought to be effected from petitioners vide Annexure A-5 (Colly.) are quashed and set aside.

¶15

¶16

The petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms.

¶17

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall

¶18

also stand disposed of.

¶19

(Satyen Vaidya) 1^st August, 2023 Judge (sushma)

Ram Singh v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Singh v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gaurav Vs State of Hp

Harnam Singh Vs State of Hp

Naveesh Prashar Vs State of Hp

Pankaj Kumar and Others Vs State of Hp and Others

Jagan Nath and Ors. Vs State of Hp and Anr.

Deepak Singh Patial Vs Balwan Chand and Another