Bhumia Ram vs Himachal Pradesh State Forest ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 9481 HP

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Bhumia Ram vs Himachal Pradesh State Forest ... on 12 July, 2024

Author: Ajay Mohan Goel

Bench: Ajay Mohan Goel

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT
                               SHIMLA
                                       CWP No. 6630 of 2024
                                       Decided on 12th July 2024




                                                        .
    Bhumia Ram





                                                                 Petitioner
                           Versus
    Himachal Pradesh State Forest Corporation Limited and





    others
                                           ...Respondents
    Coram





    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge
    1
        Whether approved for reporting?
    For the petitioner:    M/s Onkar Jairath and Piyush Mehta,
                   r       Advocates.

    For the respondents: Ms. Kiran Dhiman,                 Advocate,           for
                        respondent No.1.

                           Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General,



                           with Mr. Sumit Sharma, Deputy
                           Advocate General, for respondents
                           No.2 and 3.




    Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)

Issue notice. Ms. Kiran Dhiman, Advocate and Mr.

Sumit Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General, accept

notice on behalf of respondent No.1 and respondents No.2 and

3, respectively.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment

passed by Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in LPA No.165

.

of 2021 alongwith connected matters, titled as State of

Himachal Pradesh and others versus Surajmani and another,

decided on 12.01.2023. He further submits that the

representation (Annexure P-4) has also been made by the

petitioner in this regard and it would be in the interest of justice,

in case, this petition is disposed of with the direction that let

representation of the petitioner be decided by the Competent

Authority, in terms of the averments made in the representation

as well as the judgment being relied upon by the petitioner.

3. Without expressing any opinion on the merit of the

case, this petition is disposed of with the direction that let the

representation (Annexure P-4) made by the petitioner be

decided by the Competent Authority, in terms of the averments

made therein, taking into consideration the judgment being

relied upon by the petitioner therein, within a period of six

weeks from today.

4. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also

stand disposed of accordingly.

(Ajay Mohan Goel)

.

                                                Judge





    July 12, 2024
        (Vinod)





                 r         to