Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/1640/2012 of ARUNA SAREEN Vs COMMISSION OF INQUIRY on 29 December 2017
COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Civil Writ Petition No. 1640 of 2012. Decided on: 29th December, 2017 Aruna Sareen ….Petitioner. Versus Commission of Inquiry .….Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1No.
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.
Conclusion
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
Civil Writ Petition No. 1640 of 2012.Decided on: 29[th] December, 2017
….Petitioner.
Aruna Sareen
Versus
.….Respondents.
Commission of Inquiry
Coram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?[1]No.
For the petitioner : Mrs. R.L. Sood, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate.For the Respondents :Mr. M.A. Khan & Mr. Pramod Thakur, Additional AdvocateGeneral.
Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. (oral).
Since the respondent-Commission of Inquiry now ceases to exist, therefore, not only this writ petition, but the impugned notice Annexure PA also turned infructuous. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any.
(Dharam Chand Chaudhary) Judge.
December 29, 2017 (ps)
1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.