Single Judge dismissed appeal against refusal to interfere in disciplinary proceedings against appellant. Two-Judge bench dismissed appeal.
Appeal dismissed; pending miscellaneous application(s) disposed of accordingly.
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
{{{ LPA No. : 255 of 2024 Decided on : 19.09.2024
Amit Kumar. ...………..Appellant. Versus State of H.P. and Ors. ……......Respondents.
Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao, Chief Justice. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioner : Mr. Naresh K. Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Gobind Korla, Additional Advocate General.
M.S. Ramachandra Rao, Chief Justice (oral)
We see no reason to interfere with the well reasoned
order of the learned Single Judge refusing to interfere in the disciplinary proceedings initiated against appellant by the respondents.
1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8774 )
miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.
(M.S. Ramachandra Rao) Chief Justice
(Satyen Vaidya) 19th September, 2024 Judge
(sushma)
Neutral Citation No. ( 2024:HHC:8774 )
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere in the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the appellant by the respondents.
Amit Kumar
State of H.P. and Ors.
M.S. Ramachandra Rao
Satyen Vaidya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
