A writ petition challenging administrative action was disposed of with directions to decide a representation made by the petitioners within four weeks, relying on a prior judgment for coverage.
Direction to decide representation within four weeks.
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. 9572 of 2023 Decided on: 05.09.2024
____________________________________________________ Balram Singh and another ……….. petitioners Versus State of H.P. and another respondents ____________________________________________________ Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners : Mr. Mehar Chand Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Diwakar Dev Sharma, Additional Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Bipin Chander Negi, Judge ( oral)
Notice. Mr. Diwakar Dev Sharma, learned Additional
Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.
1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2
representations so made is appended alongwith the present petition as Annexure P-7 and is dated 16.01.2023.
List for compliance on 28th October, 2024 .
(Bipin Chander Negi) Judge
September 05, 2024 tarun
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Pinju Ram vs. State of H.P. and anotherReferred¶6
CWP No. 2494 of 2012 titled as Pinju Ram vs. State of H.P. and another, decided on 20.07.2012
Balram Singh and another
State of H.P. and another
Bipin Chander Negi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
