Petitioner sought liberty to approach higher authorities after rejection of their case. The court ordered the petition stood disposed of, reserving liberty accordingly.
Petition disposed of; liberty reserved to assail the consideration order if so advised.
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
Ex. Petition No. 11 of 2023.
Decided on : 7th August, 2023.
Suresh Kumar ...Petitioner.
Versus
HRTC ... .Respondent.
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the Petitioner: Mr. V.D. Khidtta, Advocate. For the respondent: Ms. Shubh Mahajan, Advocate.
Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral).
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
case of the petitioner has been rejected by the respondent after consideration in terms of the order passed by this Court. In view of this, no further and other orders are required to be passed save and except reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to assail the consideration order, in accordance with law, if so advised. Ordered accordingly. The petition stands disposed of.
(Satyen Vaidya) Judge
7th August 2023.
1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
…2…
(jai)
Suresh Kumar
HRTC
Satyen Vaidya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
