Himachal Pradesh High Court
RP/5/2018 on 28 December 2018
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 Review Petition No. 5 of 2018 Decided on: 28.12.2018 Gram Sudhar Sabha …Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others …Respondents
Coram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surya Kant, Chief Justice. The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, Senior Advocate, with Ms. Simrat Bedi, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate General, with Mr. J.K. Verma, Mr. Adarsh Sharma and Ms. Ritta Goswami, Additional Advocate Generals, for respondentsState. Surya Kant, Chief Justice. (Oral) This Review Application seeks to recall the order dated 1st November, 2017 passed by this Court in exercise of public interest jurisdiction, invoked suo motu powers on 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
receipt of a letter addressed to the Chief Justice of this Court. It was held vide abovestated order that the action of the Department of Ayurveda, in granting No Objection Certificate to Public Works Department to construct a road through the courtyard of Ayurvedic Health Centre, was totally unjustified and detrimental to the public interest.
2. The Review Application has been filed primarily on the ground that similar issue has been already adjudicated by the Civil Court permitting the construction of such road.
3. We are afraid that the order passed by the Civil Court can have any binding effect on the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court exercisable under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and that too, in public interest.
4. There being no error apparent on the record, we are not inclined to entertain the Review Application and the same is accordingly dismissed.
5. It goes without saying that appropriate directions have already been issued by this Court to the
Authorities to explore the possibility of identifying an alternative site to construct the road. (Surya Kant) Chief Justice
(Sandeep Sharma) Judge December 28, 2018 ( rajni )