Disposed¶19

Amit Kumar v. the State of Hp and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC4 Apr 2025CWP/4920/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Himachal Pradesh High Court (Shimla), CWP No. 4920/2025, Amit Kumar v. State of H.P. & Ors., decided 04.04.2025 by Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J.: petition disposed of without examining merits; respondent No.3/competent authority directed to decide petitioner's pending grant-in-aid representation of 02.04.2024 (Annexure P-3) within six weeks and communicate the order. Keywords: grant-in-aid, representation, mandamus, time-bound direction, six weeks, competent authority.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.3/competent authority to consider and decide the petitioner's representation dated 02.04.2024 in accordance with law within six weeks and communicate the order so passed to the petitioner; pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. ¶19

Amit Kumar Vs the State of Hp and Others — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No. 4920/2025 Decided on: 04.04.2025 Amit Kumar …Petitioner

¶3

Versus

¶4

State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents.

¶5

………………………………………………………………………………. Coram

¶6

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶7

For the petitioner: Mr. Ajay Thakur, Advocate.

¶8

For the respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General.

¶9

Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J

¶10

Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate

¶11

General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

¶12

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage.

¶13

2 . The writ petition has been filed for the grant of following

¶14

substantive reliefs:-

¶15

“(i) That appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction may very kindly be issued to respondents to give the benefit of Grand-in-Aid. (ii) That respondent may very kindly be directed to decide the representation of the petitioner which is pending before the respondent department.”

¶16

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

¶17

¶18

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has preferred a representation on 02.04.2024 (Annexure P- 3) to the respondent No.3/competent authority seeking grant-in-aid. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied, in case, the respondent No.3/competent authority is directed to decide the aforesaid representation, which has still not been decided, within a time bound schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection to the above prayer.

¶19

4. Having regard to the above submissions and without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent No.3/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner, in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from today. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioner. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

¶20

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge

¶21

04^th April, 2025(rohit)

Amit Kumar v. the State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Kumar v. the State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Praveen Kumar Vs Hrtc and Others

Chuni Lal Vs the State of Hp and Others

Vishal Vs the State of Hp and Others

Sunil Kumar Vs the Hrtc and Others

Bimla Devi Sharma Vs the State of Hp and Others

Mohar Singh Vs Hpsfc and Another