A writ petition by a contractor against the State of Himachal Pradesh was withdrawn at the petitioner's request before any adjudication. The court permitted the withdrawal and dismissed the petition as withdrawn, disposing of pending miscellaneous applications accordingly.
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
CWP No. : 1008 of 2023
Decided on : 23.05.2024
Prime Contractors. ...………..Petitioner.
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. ……......Respondents.
Coram
Hon’ble Mr. Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao, Chief Justice. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioner :
Mr. Abhimanyu Thakur, Advocate, vice Mr. Amit Kumar Dhumal, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Pranay Pratap Singh, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Sidharth Jalta, Deputy Advocate General.
M.S. Ramachandra Rao, Chief Justice (oral)
Learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw
the Writ petition. Permission accorded.
1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2
withdrawn. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand
disposed of accordingly.
(M.S. Ramachandra Rao) Chief Justice
(Satyen Vaidya) 23rd May, 2024 Judge (sushma)
3
Prime Contractors
State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors.
M.S. Ramachandra Rao
Satyen Vaidya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
