Decided On: November 2 vs State Drugs Controller And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 17869 HP

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Decided On: November 2 vs State Drugs Controller And Another on 21 November, 2024

Author: Sandeep Sharma

Bench: Sandeep Sharma

                                                                                2024:HHC:11915




         IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
                                            CWP No. 13349 of 2024
                                    Decided on: November 21, 2024
________________________________________________________
Arun Kumar and others                            ...........Petitioners
                                   Versus
State Drugs Controller and another                 ....Respondents
________________________________________________________
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting? 1

For the Petitioners                    :      Mr. Mohan Sharma, Advocate.
For the Respondents                    :
                              Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar
                              and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional
                              Advocates General with Mr. Ravi
                              Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General,
                              for respondent No.1.
                              Mr. Janesh Mahajan, Advocate, for
                              respondent No.3.
                              Nemo for respondent No.3.
________________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral):

After arguing for a while, learned counsel for the petitioners

seeks permission to withdraw the present petition, with liberty to file

appropriate representation to authority concerned.

2. In view of above, present petition is disposed of with liberty to

the petitioners to file representation, airing their grievances, within two

days to respondent University, which in turn shall be considered within

two days thereafter, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the

petitioners. Needless to say, authority concerned shall take into

consideration Annexure P-9, while deciding the representation, if any,

filed by the petitioners, pursuant to this order and within the stipulated

time.

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

2 2024:HHC:11915

3. Mr. Janesh Mahajan, Advocate, appearing for the respondent

University, undertakes to apprise concerned authority of the University,

with regard to passing of instant order, so that needful is done within

stipulated time.

Petition stands disposed of in the afore terms, alongwith all

pending applications.

(Sandeep Sharma) Judge November 21, 2024 (vikrant)