Petitioners in two Civil Writ Petitions allowed to withdraw their petitions with liberty to file afresh. Court disposed of the matters as withdrawn. No substantive legal issue was decided.
Petitions allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to file afresh; matters disposed of as withdrawn.
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 Nos. 5575/2020 & 5571/2020
Decided on: 9.4.2024
CWPOA No. 5575/2020 Roop Lal & ors. …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & ors. ….Respondents CWPOA No. 5571/2020 Man Chand & ors. …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & ors. ….Respondents
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge . The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No
For the petitioner(s): Mr. Vinod Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, A.G. with Mr. Y. W. Chauhan, Sr. Addl. A.G., Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Raj Negi, Dy.A.G.
Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan (oral)
Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) states that he is
under instructions to withdraw both petitions with liberty to file the same afresh. His statement is taken on record. Prayer being innocuous and not opposed is allowed.
1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.
2
2 Consequently, the petitions are disposed of, as
withdrawn, so also the pending application(s), if any, with liberty as aforesaid.
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan) Judge
(Sushil Kukreja) 9.4.2024 Judge (pankaj)
Roop Lal & ors.
Man Chand & ors.
State of H.P.
Tarlok Singh Chauhan
Sushil Kukreja
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
