Writ petition disposed of as infructuous; counsel stated the petitioner did not respond and intervening circumstances rendered the subject matter infructuous.
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
CWPOA No. 1073 of 2019
Decided on: 17.09.2024
Partap Singh. .…Petitioner.
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors.
…Respondents.
Coram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
| For the petitioner | : | Mr. Vikas Rajput, Advocate. |
|---|---|---|
| For the respondents | : | Mr. Sidharth Jalta, Deputy Advocate General for respondents No. 1 to 3. |
Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral)
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that though he had tried to contact the petitioner but petitioner has not responded and according to him,
due to intervening circumstances, the subject matter of the petition has been rendered infructuous.
2. Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed
of as having been rendered infructuous.
1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2
Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8612 )
shall also stand disposed of.
(Satyen Vaidya) 17th September, 2024 Judge (sushma)
Partap Singh
State of Himachal Pradesh
Respondents No. 2 and 3
Satyen Vaidya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
