Himachal Pradesh High Court
Pushpa Sharma vs State Of H.P. And Others on 27 October, 2015
Bench: Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Tarlok Singh Chauhan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No.4253 of 2015
Decided on: 27.10.2015.
.
Pushpa Sharma ..........Petitioner.
versus
State of H.P. and others ...........Respondents.
___________________________________________________________________
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr.Justice Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice.
The Hon'ble Mr.Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge.
of
Whether approved for reporting? Yes.
For the Petitioner: Mr.Tara Singh Chauhan, Advocate.
For the respondents:
rt M/s V.S. Chauhan, Addl.A.G., J.K.
Verma, Dy.A.G. and Ramesh Thakur,
Asstt.A.G., for respondents No.1 to 3.
________________________________________________________
Mansoor Ahmad Mir, C.J. (Oral)
Petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court for quashing the order of allotment of tender in favour of private respondent on the grounds taken in the memo of the writ petition.
The main relief sought is against the Cooperative Society/respondent No.5.
2. This Court in CWP No.6709 of 2013, titled Sanjeev Kumar and others vs. State of H.P. and others, decided on 4.8.2014, reported in Latest HLJ 2014 (HP) 1061, while replying on the earlier decision of this Court in Chandresh Kumar Malhotra vs. H.P.State Coop. Bank and others 1993(2) Sim.L.C. 243, which decision was also affirmed by the Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court in Vikram Chauhan vs. The Managing Director and ors. Latest HLJ 2013 (HP) ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 19:14:48 :::HCHP ...2...
742 (FB), has held that the cooperative societies cannot be termed .
as "State" within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution.
3. The Apex Court, in the decision rendered in Thalappalam Ser. Co-op. Bank Ltd. and others vs. State of Kerala and others, 2013 AIR SCW 5683, after discussing the entire law on of the subject, has also held that a Cooperative Society does not fall within the expression "State" or an "instrumentality of the State", rt within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India.
4. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy by resorting to appropriate proceedings. Prayer allowed. The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty as prayed for.
5. Pending CMPs, if any, also stand disposed of.
(Mansoor Ahmad Mir) Chief Justice.
October 27, 2015 (Tarlok Singh Chauhan)
(Tilak) Judge
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 19:14:48 :::HCHP