Ashoka vs State Of H.P. And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 16991 HP

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

                                                 CWP No. 8074 of 2023




                                                                     .
                                                 Decided on: 20.10.2023





     Ashoka                                                      ....Petitioner.





                                         Versus

     State of H.P. and Ors.                                      ...Respondents.

     Coram





     The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge.
     Whether approved for reporting? 1


     For the petitioner          :       Mr. Onkar Jairath, Advocate.

     For the respondents         :       Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta and Mr.
                                         Pratush    Sharma,  Additional
                                         Advocate Generals, with    Ms.



                                         Priyanka Chauhan, Mr. Gautam
                                         Sood and Mr. Rahul    Thakur,
                                         Deputy Advocate Generals






     Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral)

Notice. Mr. Rahul Thakur, learned Deputy

Advocate General, appears and waives service of

notice on behalf of the respondents.

2. Leaned counsel for the petitioner states

that petitioner would be content and satisfied in case 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

his case is considered and decided by the

respondents/competent authority in terms of

.

judgment dated 03.11.2010, passed by this Court in

CWP-T No.2114 of 2008, titled Mukesh Manhas &

others Vs. State of H.P. & Another, (Annexure P-3),

upheld by a Division Bench of this Court in LPA

No.380 of 2011, titled State of H.P. & another vs.

Mukesh Manhas & others, decided on 20.09.2012

(Annexure P-4). Learned Deputy Advocate General is

not averse to the aforesaid innocuous prayer made by

the petitioner.

3. Having perused aforesaid judgment sought

to be relied upon vis-a-vis issue raised in the petition

at hand, this Court finds that the issue raised in the

instant petition already stands adjudicated in the

aforesaid judgment rendered by this Court and as

such, no prejudice would be caused to either of the

parties in case respondents are directed to consider

and decide the case of the petitioner in light of the

aforesaid judgment.

4. Consequently, in view of the above, present

petition is disposed of with direction to the

.

respondents to consider and decide the case of the

petitioner in light of Mukesh Manhas's case (supra),

expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks

from today. In case, petitioner is found to be similarly

situate to the petitioners in the aforesaid judgment,

he would be extended similar benefits. Needles to say,

authority concerned while doing the needful in terms

of the instant order shall afford an opportunity of

hearing to the petitioner and pass detailed speaking

order thereupon. However, liberty is reserved to the

petitioner to file appropriate proceedings before

appropriate Court of law, if he still remains aggrieved.

5. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if

any, shall also stand disposed of.

                                              (Satyen Vaidya)
    20th October, 2023                            Judge
         (sushma)