Gurdeep Singh vs State Of H.P. & Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 16184 HP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.3983 of 2023 Date of Decision: 12.10.2023

.

_______________________________________________________

Gurdeep Singh .......Petitioner Versus

State of H.P. & others ... Respondents

_______________________________________________________ Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1

For the Petitioners: Mr. Bonit Thakur, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals with Mr. Ravi Chauhan and Ms. r Sunaina, Deputy Advocate Generals.

__________________________________________________________

Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral):

Learned counsel representing the petitioner states that

his client would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued

to the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in

light of judgment dated 14th July 2021 passed by this Court in CWP

No.1747 of 2020, titled Hari Chand and others versus State of H.P.

and others in a time bound manner. Learned Additional Advocate

General representing the respondents is not averse to aforesaid

innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner.

2. Having perused the averments contained in the petition

as well as relief prayed therein vis-à-vis judgment sought to be relied

Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

upon, this Court finds that the issue raised in the instant petition

already stands adjudicated by this Court in the aforesaid judgment

and as such, no prejudice, if any, would be caused to either of the

.

parties, if the respondents are directed to consider and decide the

case of the petitioner in light of judgment supra.

3. Consequently, in view of the above, the present petition

is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider and

decide the case of the petitioner in light of aforesaid judgment

expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks. Needless to

say, authority concerned while doing the needful in terms of instant

order shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and

pass detailed speaking order thereupon. Liberty is reserved to the

petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate Court of law, if

he still remains aggrieved. Pending application(s), if any, also stands

disposed of.

(Sandeep Sharma), Judge October 12, 2023 (shankar)