The Hpsebl Vs Ramesh Chand Parihar — Himachal Pradesh HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

The Hpsebl Vs Ramesh Chand Parihar — Himachal Pradesh HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal disposed of by setting aside the judgment dated 4.4.2024 in CWP No. 2820 of 2024 and restoring the writ petition to its original status with original number, to be listed before the appropriate Bench alongwith CWP No. 2108 of 2023 on 24.12.2024; appellant-Board to endeavour to file reply before the next date of hearing; pending application(s), if any, also disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether, in view of the Division Bench having recalled the order dt. 31.05.2023 in CWP No. 2108 of 2023 (on which the impugned judgment dated 4.4.2024 in CWP No. 2820 of 2024 was founded), that judgment should be set aside and the writ petition restored.

Court's answer

Judgment dated 4.4.2024 passed in CWP No. 2820 of 2024 is set aside and CWP No. 2820 of 2024 is restored to its original status with original number, with direction to be listed before the appropriate Bench alongwith CWP No. 2108 of 2023 on 24th December, 2024.

Ratio / Principle

The appellant-respondent Board shall make endeavour to file its reply, if any, in CWP No. 2820 of 2024 before the next date of hearing.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Letters Patent Appeal — HPSEBL v. Ramesh Chand Parihar — restoration of writ petition. The respondent's writ petition (CWP No. 2820 of 2024) had been allowed on 4.4.2024 in terms of the relief granted in CWP Nos. 2108 of 2023 (Bhagat Ram Vs. HRTC) and 2421 of 2023 (Amar Chand Vs. HRTC & others). Subsequently, the Division Bench of this Court, by judgment dated 30.8.2024 in Review Petition No. 98 of 2024 (HRTC Vs. Bhagat Ram), allowed the review, recalled its order dt. 31.05.2023 in CWP No. 2108 of 2023 and restored that petition to the file of the Court. In view of this development and as agreed between the parties, the Division Bench (Vivek Singh Thakur and Rakesh Kainthla, JJ.) set aside the judgment dated 4.4.2024 in CWP No. 2820 of 2024 and restored it to its original status with original number, directing listing before the appropriate Bench alongwith CWP No. 2108 of 2023 on 24th December, 2024; the Board was directed to endeavour to file its reply before the next date of hearing. Appeal disposed of, alongwith pending application(s), if any.

2024:HHC:14819

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

LPA No. 355 of 2024

Date of decision: 17.12.2024

HPSEBL.		…Appellant.
	Versus
Ramesh Chand Parihar.		…Respondent.
*Corum*

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge.

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?¹

For the Appellant. Ms.Sunita Sharma, Senior Advocate, alongwith Mr.Dhananjay Sharma, Advocate.

For the Respondent : Mr.Prakash Sharma, Advocate.

Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge (Oral)

Present appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated

4.4.2024 passed in CWP No. 2820 of 2024, titled as Ramesh Chand Parihar

Vs. H.P. State Electricity Board Ltd., whereby petition filed by respondent has been allowed in terms of relief granted to the petitioners in CWP No. 2108 of 2023, titled as Bhagat Ram Vs. HRTC, decided on 31.5.2023 and CWP No.

2421 of 2023, titled as Amar Chand Vs. HRTC & others, decided on 15.6.2023.

1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes

2

2024:HHC:14819

LPA No. 355 of 2024

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the parties that at the time of passing of judgment dated 4.4.2024, it was agreed between the parties that similarly situated petitioners have been granted relief in CWP Nos. 2108 of 2023 and 2421 of 2023 and accordingly petition was disposed of.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that judgment in CWP Nos. 2108 of 2023 has been set aside by Division Bench of this Court in Review Petition No. 98 of 2024, titled as HRTC Vs. Bhagat Ram on 30.8.2024. Review Petition No. 98 of 2024 has been allowed in following

terms:-

“6. Though the learned Counsel for the respondent in the Review Petition opposed the review of the said order, since the review petitioner contends that proper opportunity was not given to contest the matter and that there are certain financial implications for the Corporation, we deem it appropriate to review our order dt. 31.05.2023, passed in CWP no. 2108 of 2023. Accordingly, the said order is recalled and CWP no. 2108 of 2023 is restored to the file of the Court. The Review petitioners/respondents in the Writ petition shall file reply in the matter placing all facts on record by 25.09.2024.”

In view of above development, as agreed between the parties, judgment dated 4.4.2024 passed in CWP No. 2820 of 2024 is set aside and CWP No. 2820 of 2024 is ordered to be restored to its original status with original number with direction to be listed before the appropriate Bench alongwith CWP No. 2108 of 2023 on 24^th December, 2024.

3

2024:HHC:14819

LPA No. 355 of 2024

Appellant-respondent Board shall make endeavor to file reply, if

any, in the CWP No. 2820 of 2024 before next date of hearing.

Appeal is disposed of in aforesaid terms, so also pending

application(s), if any.

(Vivek Singh Thakur), Judge.

(Rakesh Kainthla), Judge.

12^th December, 2024

(Keshav)