Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 5]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others vs Rita Devi And Another on 6 August, 2018

Bench: Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Vivek Singh Thakur

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

                                          Civil Writ Petition No. 2556 of 2017




                                                                             .
                                        Date of Decision           6th August, 2018





    ________________________________________________________

        State of Himachal Pradesh and others                             ....Petitioner
                                    Versus





    Rita Devi and another
                                                                        ....Respondents
    ________________________________________________________





    Coram
    The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J.
    The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, J.

        Whether approved for reporting?1

    ______________________________________________________________
    For the Petitioner:                         Mr. Vikas Rathour and Mr.Narinder
                                                Guleria,   Additional   Advocate
                                                General.



    For the Respondents:          Mr.M.L. Sharma, Advocate                                     for
                                  respondent No.1 and none                                     for
                                  respondent No.2.




    _____________________________________________________________
    Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J.(Oral)

This Court on 26.6.2018 passed the following order:-

"Heard for some time. The record reveals that the petitioner-State has considered the matter as directed and rejected the claim of respondent No.1-original applicant vide order Annexure P-3. Prima facie, in view of this development, there was no occasion to the petitioner to have filed this writ petition and challenged the impugned order, which stands 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes ::: Downloaded on - 07/08/2018 23:02:50 :::HCHP 2 implemented by it. The grouse, if any, thereby could have been said to be to the first respondent. Being so, the writ petition could have been disposed of with these .
observations, however, learned Additional Advocate General seeks time to have instructions. Allowed....."

2. Evidently, the case was adjourned on the aforesaid date only on the pretext as the learned Additional Advocate General sought time to obtain instructions in light of the observations made. The matter was then adjourned for 2nd July, 2018 and thereafter to 9th July, 2018 when it was again adjourned for 6.8.2018.

3 Even today, learned Additional Advocate General is not in a position to impart instructions and rightly so, because the order under challenge has admittedly already been implemented by the petitioners themselves.

4. Hence nothing survives for adjudication in this petition and the same is accordingly dismissed, along with all pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.




                                             (Tarlok Singh Chauhan)
                                                     Judge


    August 06, 2018                            (Vivek Singh Thakur),
         ms                                                 Judge




                                               ::: Downloaded on - 07/08/2018 23:02:50 :::HCHP