Himachal Pradesh High Court
Frankfinn Aviation Services Pvt. Ltd ... vs Himachal Pradesh Private Educational ... on 18 April, 2018
Author: Ajay Mohan Goel
Bench: Ajay Mohan Goel
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CMPMO No. 548 of 2017
Decided on: 18.4.2018
.
Frankfinn Aviation Services Pvt. Ltd and others.
....Petitioners.
Versus
Himachal Pradesh Private Educational Institutions Regulatory
Commission and others.
... Respondents.
................................................................................................
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
r No.
For the petitioners. : Mr. N.K. Sood, Sr. Advocate with Mr.
Aman Sood, Advocate.
For respondents : Mr. Dilip Sharma, Sr. Advocate with
Ms. Shikha Verma, Advocate for
respondents No.1 and 2.
: None for respondent No.3.
Ajay Mohan Goel, J.(Oral)
As per report of the Registry, respondent No.3 is reported to be un-served on the ground that no such person resides at the given address.
2. By way of present petition, petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:-
1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?::: Downloaded on - 19/04/2018 23:21:02 :::HCHP 2
"i) Respondent No.1 and 2 be directed to decide the Review Petition (Annexure P-7) as also prayer for interim stay as made therein and also on application dated 6.12.2017 (Annexure P-9) and further the respondents No. 1 and 2 be directed not to implement its directions as .
contained in its order dated 14.11.2017 (Annexure P-6).
ii) Records of the case be also summoned from respondents No.1 and 2.
iii) Any other suitable writ, order or direction found appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the present case, so as to ensure the smooth running of the activity in petitioners No.2 and 3 Institutions be made till the main Review Petition is decided by the respondent Commission."
3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the pleadings, in my considered view, interest of justice would be served in case this petition is disposed of with direction to respondents No.1 and 2 to decide the review petition of the petitioners, which is pending before them within a reasonable time and with further direction to respondents not to take any coercive action against the petitioners till the petition is decided, in accordance with law.
4. Accordingly this petition is disposed of with direction to respondents No.1 and 2 to decide the review petition of the petitioners in accordance with law after giving them an opportunity of being heard within a period of three months from today. Till the time decision is taken on the said review petition of the petitioners, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners. Petitioners shall at the first instance appear before the respondents on 18th May, 2018 and thereafter respondent No.2 shall fix the date for further proceedings.
::: Downloaded on - 19/04/2018 23:21:02 :::HCHP 3Petition stands disposed of accordingly, so also pending miscellaneous applications, if any.
(Ajay Mohan Goel) .
Judge 18th April, 2018.
(Guleria)
r to
::: Downloaded on - 19/04/2018 23:21:02 :::HCHP