Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/553/2020 of M/S PREETHI HIMACHAL AND CO Vs UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS on 8 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.553 of 2020 Decided on: 08.09.2026 M/s Preethi Himaachal & Co. ...Petitioner Versus Union of India and others … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Yogesh Jaswal, Judge Whether
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No.553 of 2020 Decided on: 08.09.2026 M/s Preethi Himaachal & Co. ...Petitioner Versus Union of India and others … Respondents
Coram
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Yogesh Jaswal, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 _____________________________________________________ For the petitioner : Mr. Goverdhan Lal Sharma, Advocate For the respondents : Mr. Bharat Bhushan, Senior Penal Counsel for respondent No.1 (UOI) : Mr. Ishaan Kashyap, Advocate, for respondents No.2 to 4. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge
( Oral) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:- “i)Issue appropriate writ, order or direction setting aside the impugned orders dated 24.1.2020 passed by the Respondent no. 2 (Annexure P-9) and impugned order dated 24.1.2020 (Annexure P-10) passed by Respondent no. 3 and grant full of stay of demand till the time appeal pending before Respondent no. 2 is finally decided; ii)Issue appropriate writ, order or direction setting aside the impugned orders dated 24.1.2020 passed by the Respondent no. 2 (Annexure P-9) and impugned order dated 24.1.2020 passed by Respondent no. 3 (Annexure P-10) and direct 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. Respondent no.2 or 3 to decide the stay application vide a detailed order after affording an opportunity of hearing; iii)Issue appropriate writ, order or direction that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner till the time full stay of demand is granted by this Hon'ble Court or till the time the stay application is pending for adjudication; iv)Issue appropriate writ, order or direction directing Respondent no. 2 for early disposal of the appeal filed before him; v)Issue appropriate writ, order or direction for such further and other reliefs, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case.”
2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner informs the Court that while assailing the impugned order in this Court, the petitioner had also availed the statutory appellate remedy and in the light of the fact that its appeal has been allowed, this petition has been rendered infructuous. He submits that the petition can be closed as such. The petition stands disposed of on account of subsequent developments. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.
(Ajay Mohan Goel)
Judge (Yogesh Jaswal)
Judge September 08, 2026 (meera)