Himachal Pradesh High Court
Praveen Rajput vs State Of H.P. And Others on 17 March, 2018
Bench: Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Ajay Mohan Goel
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. : 521 of 2018.
.
Decided on: 17.03.2018.
Praveen Rajput ....Petitioner.
Versus
State of H.P. and others ...Respondents.
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge.
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the petitioner : Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Anita Parmar, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate General with Mr. Ajay Vaidya, Sr. Addl. Advocate General and M/s.
Ranjan Sharma Adarsh Sharma, Addl. Advocate Generals.
Tarlok Singh Chauhan (Oral) Notice. Mr. Adarsh Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General appears and waives notice on behalf of the respondents.
2. This petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs:-
"(i) That the entire record pertaining to the petitioner's case and particularly relating to the Devel ::: Downloaded on - 17/03/2018 23:04:45 :::HCHP Convent School Jawalamukhi may please be summoned and examined.
(ii) That the Respondent No. 2 may please be directed .
to take up and consider the petitioner's documents for recognition of Delhi Convent School Jawalamukhi.
(iii) That if during such recognition, any deficiency is found in the petitioner's record, a reasonable opportunity and time be granted to the petitioner to make up such deficiency.
(iv) Annexure P-3 & P-4 may please be quashed and set aside. (v) Any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be issued/passed in favour of the petitioner."
3. It appears that the petitioner was issued show cause notice Annexure P-3 on 17.02.2018. Even though reply to the said notice was filed, but that was only after respondents have already initiated action against the petitioner vide letter dated 13.03.2018, Annexure P-4, whereby the school in issue was directed to be closed within a period of two days.
4. We are of the considered view that respondents, in fact, should have taken into consideration the reply so filed as two days' time was given to the petitioner to close down the school had not lapsed by then. Therefore, in the given circumstances, we feel that ends of justice will meet in case ::: Downloaded on - 17/03/2018 23:04:45 :::HCHP respondents are directed to consider the contents of reply dated 14.03.2018, Annexure P-5, and thereafter pass a fresh .
order after hearing the petitioner, within a period of two weeks from today. Ordered accordingly, and till then the operation of Annexures P-3 and P-4 is stayed.
With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed of, so also pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. r Copy dasti.
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan) Judge (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge March 17, 2018 {narender) ::: Downloaded on - 17/03/2018 23:04:45 :::HCHP