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 3]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Pavan Kumar vs State Of H.P. And Others on 6 January, 2015

Bench: Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Tarlok Singh Chauhan

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,
                        SHIMLA
                                      CWP No.6635 of 2014, with CWP




                                                              .
                                      Nos.6637, 6638 and 6639 of 2014.





                                      Decided on: January 6, 2015.
    1. CWP No.6635 of 2014:





    Pavan Kumar                                             ..........Petitioner.
                       versus
    State of H.P. and others                       ...........Respondents.





    2. CWP No.6637 of 2014:
    Partap Chand                                   ..........Petitioner.
                       versus
    State of H.P. and others                       ...........Respondents.


    3. CWP No.6638 of 2014:

    Rakesh Kumar Chandel                           ..........Petitioner.

                       versus



    State of H.P. and others                       ...........Respondents.

    4. CWP No.6639 of 2014:




    Madhu Bala                                     ..........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.
    Whether approved for reporting?
    For the Petitioner(s):      Mr.Arun Sehgal, Advocate.
    For the Respondents:       Mr.Shrawan Dogra, Advocate General,
                               with Mr.Romesh Verma & Mr.Anup
                               Rattan, Addl.A.Gs. and Mr.J.K. Verma,
                               Dy.A.G., for respondents No.1 to 3.
                               President of PTA present in person.
    ____________________________________________________________




                                           ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 17:29:05 :::HCHP
                                      ...2...


    Mansoor Ahmad Mir, C.J. (Oral)

.

Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) stated at the Bar that similarly situated persons/writ petitioners, whose services were also terminated orally, invoked the jurisdiction of this Court by the medium of CWP No.6341 of 2014, were absorbed by the respondents, which resulted in the disposal of the writ petition as having become infructuous and prayed that the respondents be also directed to redress the grievance of the present writ petitioners on the same analogy. His statement is taken on record.

Mr.Anup Rattan, learned Additional Advocate General, has no objection.

2. In view of the above, the writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent Authority to examine the case of the writ petitioners, while keeping in view the instructions in vogue and the judgment referred to above.

3. Pending CMPs, if any, also stand disposed of.

(Mansoor Ahmad Mir) Chief Justice.

6th January, 2015. (Tarlok Singh Chauhan) (Tilak) Judge ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 17:29:05 :::HCHP