Petitioners' counsel stated the writ petition had become infructuous; the High Court accordingly dismissed it as infructuous along with pending applications.
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.5820 of 2020 Decided on: 22.04.2024
| Dr. Neelam Kumari & others Versus State of H.P. & another |
...Petitioners ...Respondents |
|---|---|
| Coram | |
| The Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.S. Ramachandra The Hon’ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua _Whether approvedfor reporting? _ |
Rao, Chief Justice , Judge |
| For the petitioners: Ms. Shikha Chauhan, |
Advocate. |
| For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Ad Mr. Rakesh Dhaulta, |
vocate General with Mr. Pranay Pratap |
| Singh, Mr. Gobind Advocates General M |
Korla, Additional s.Priyanka Chauhan |
| and Ms. Leena Advocates General, State. |
Guleria, Deputy for the respondent- |
M.S. Ramachandra Rao, Chief Justice (Oral)
Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the writ
petition has become infructuous.
having become infructuous alongwith pending application(s), if any.
( M.S. Ramachandra Rao ) Chief Justice
( Jyotsna Rewal Dua ) Judge
April 22, 2024 (vt)
Dr. Neelam Kumari & others
State of H.P.
M.S. Ramachandra Rao
Jyotsna Rewal Dua
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
