Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/9639/2014 on 30 December 2014
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. 9639 of 2014-D
Date of decision : 30.12.2014
Sunder Singh
… Petitioner.
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and others … Respondents.
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge.
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice P.S. Rana, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 No.
For the Petitioner : Mr. Davinder Chauhan Jaita, Advocate.
For the Respondents : Mr. Shrawan Dogra, A.G. with Mr. V.S.
Chauhan, Addl. A.G. and Mr. Vikram
Thakur, Dy. A.G. for State.
Sanjay Karol, Judge (Oral)
CMP No.21111/2014
Allowed. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, petition is taken up for hearing today itself. Application stands disposed of.
CWP No.9639/2014
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, under instructions, submits that petitioner’s case is squarely covered by the decision rendered by this Court in CWP No.7414/2011, titled as Surat Ram vs. State of H.P., on 8.9.2011. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner shall approach the respondents clearly bringing out such facts to their notice.
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? High Court of H.P. 2014:HHC:11792-DB ::: Downloaded on - 04/11/2026 00:10:27 :::CIS
…2…
3. No other point is urged.
4. As such, as prayed for, we dispose of the present petition with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide petitioner’s request, in accordance with law, more so in the light of the decision rendered by this Court in Surat Ram (supra), within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt thereof, by affording adequate opportunity of hearing/representation to the petitioner. Needless to add, if the order is not in favour of the petitioner, the authority shall assign reasons while deciding the same, which shall be communicated to the petitioner. Liberty reserved to the petitioner to approach the Court if need so arises subsequently.
With the aforesaid observations, present petition stands disposed of, so also pending application(s), if any.
Copy Dasti.
(Sanjay Karol),
Judge.
(P.S. Rana), December 30, 2014 (KS)
Judge. High Court of H.P. 2014:HHC:11792-DB ::: Downloaded on - 04/11/2026 00:10:27 :::CIS