The High Court of Himachal Pradesh allowed an application seeking acceptance of reasons for delay in filing a Leave Petition and granted an interim stay on further proceedings in a connected writ petition.
Acceptance of reasons for delay in filing LPA and interim stay on further proceedings in CWP No. 9928 of 2023.
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.
State of H.P. & others vs. Raghav Singh Jaswal
CMP(M) No. 294 of 2024.
02.07.2024 Present: Mr. Rakesh Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General, Mr. Sidharath Jalta, Deputy Advocate General and Ms. Priyanka Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for the applicants.
None for the respondent.
No reply on behalf of the respondent is filed even
though time was granted on 29th May, 2024 and 19th June, 2024. Therefore, it is treated that the respondent does not wish to file any reply. Accordingly, this application is allowed accepting the reasons assigned for delay in filing the LPA.
LPA No.178 of 2024 & CMP No. 10424 of 2024.
Having regard to the order passed on 16th May, 2024 in LPA No. 93 of 2024 and for the reasons alike, there shall be interim stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the order dt. 07.12.2023 in CWP No. 9928 of 2023.
List on 24th September, 2024.
( M. S. Ramachandra Rao) Chief Justice.
(Satyen Vaidya) Judge.
2nd July, 2024. (jai)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
State of H.P.
Raghav Singh Jaswal
M. S. Ramachandra Rao
Satyen Vaidya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
