Disposed

Damodar Singh and Others v. State of Hp and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC14 Mar 2024CWP/1935/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Himachal Pradesh, in a writ petition under Article 226, directed the respondents to expediently decide the petitioners' recruitment case by relying on a prior judgment in CWPOA No.3573 of 2019.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to consider and decide the petitioners' case expeditiously, preferably within four weeks, in light of CWPOA No.3573 of 2019.

Damodar Singh and Others Vs State of Hp and… — Service and Employment | Himachal Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.1935 of 2024 Decided on 14.03.2024

¶2

_________________________________________________________ Damodar Singh & Ors. Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. Respondents _________________________________________________________

¶3

Coram:

¶4

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶5

For the petitioners	: Ms.Jyoti Dogra, Advocate.
For the respondents	: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar, Mr.
	B.C. Verma, Additional Advocate
	General with Ms.Menka Raj Chauhan,
	Deputy Advocate General.

¶6

Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral):

¶7

By way of instant petition, petitioners have approached this

¶8

Court in the instant proceedings filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying therein following substantive reliefs:

¶9

“i). That the respondents may kindly be directed to give appointment to the petitioners by completing the process of recruitment by declaring the result of counseling and completing all formalities.

¶10

ii) That the case of the petitioners may kindly be directed to considered in the light of CWPOA No.3573 of

¶11

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

¶12

¶13

2019, titled as Yog Raj & Ors. vs. State of H.P., which has been decided on19.07.2022 and stay has been vacated.”

¶14

Before reply, if any, could be called for, on behalf of the respondents, learned counsel representing the petitioners, while inviting attention of this Court to judgment dated 19.07.2022, passed in CWPOA No.3573 of 2019 , titled Yog Raj & Ors. vs. State of H.P. & Ors . stated that petitioners would be content and satisfied in case, direction is issued to the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioners in light of aforesaid judgment.

¶15

While appearing on behalf of the respondents, Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General stated that he is not averse to the aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioners.

¶16

Consequently, in view of above, present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioners, in light of the judgment (supra), expeditiously, preferably within four weeks. Needless to say, respondents shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass a speaking order thereafter. Liberty is reserved to the petitioners to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate court, if they still remain aggrieved.

¶17

¶18

Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms

¶19

alongwith all pending applications.

¶20

14^th March, 2024 ( Sandeep Sharma ) (reena) Judge

Damodar Singh and Others v. State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Damodar Singh and Others 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nirmala Devi Vs Ramesh Chand

Jagdish Chand and Others Vs State of Hp and Others

Shadi Ram Thakur Vs State of Hp and Others

Bionexy Pharma Vs Hpsebl and Others

Sarup Lal Upadhyay Vs State of Hp and Others

Phunchog and Others Vs State of Hp and Others