Compliance petition arising from directions in CWP No. 2600 of 2022; respondents passed the required consideration order, and the court disposed of the petition leaving petitioner free to challenge that order in accordance with law.
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.
Ex. Pet. No. 211 of 2024 Date of decision: 01.04.2024
Jagdish Chand …Petitioner Versus State of H. P. & Ors. …Respondents
Co ram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting? No.
For the Petitioner: Mr. Ashish Verma, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, A. G. with Mr. I. N. Mehta, Sr. Addl. A.G., Ms. Sharmila Patial, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Raj Negi, Dy. A.G.
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge (Oral)
Notice. Ms. Sharmila Patial, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.
2
applications, if any.
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan) Judge
(Sushil Kukreja) 1st April, 2024 (sanjeev) Judge
Jagdish Chand
State of H. P.
Ors.
Tarlok Singh Chauhan
Sushil Kukreja
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
