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 9]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Narender Kumar And Others vs State Of Hp And Others on 26 July, 2016

Bench: Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Tarlok Singh Chauhan

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA.

                                                             CWP No. 1709 of 2016.
                                                     Date of decision: 26th July, 2016.




                                                                                       .
                   Narender Kumar and others                                .....Petitioners





                                     Versus
                   State of HP 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 ?1

           For the petitioners:                      Mr. Suresh Kumar Thakur, Advocate.
           For the respondents:   rt                 Mr.Shrawan Dogra, Advocate
                                                     General with Mr. Anup Rattan,
                                                     Additional Advocate General with

                                                     Mr. J.K. Verma and Mr. Kush
                                                     Sharma,      Deputy     Advocate
                                                     Generals, for respondents No.1.
                                                     Mr. Sunil Mohan Goel and Mr.
                                                     Raman Jamalta, Advocates, for



                                                     respondents No. 2 to 7.

           Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice (Oral)

The petitioner, by the medium of this writ petition, has sought quashment of Annexure P3 which contains list of selected candidates who are not party respondents in the writ petition.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners was asked to justify the maintainability of the writ petition.

He was repeatedly asked whether he wants to amend 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?.

::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:53:05 :::HCHP -2-

the writ petition and array selected persons as party respondents in the writ petition. He was reluctant to do so. He was further asked whether any relief can be .

granted in the writ petition without arraying selected candidates as party respondents? He was not in a position to reply.

3. The writ petition, on the face of it, is not of maintainable and is accordingly, dismissed in limine, alongwith pending applications, if any. However, it is rt made clear that the dismissal of the writ petition will not come in the way of the petitioners to seek appropriate remedy, including filing of the writ petition. Dasti copy.

(Mansoor Ahmad Mir) Chief Justice.

July 26, 2016. (Tarlok Singh Chauhan) (cm Thakur) Judge.

::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:53:05 :::HCHP