AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
11 paragraphs · 160 wordsRavi Malimath, J
Petitioner’s counsel submits that respondent No.3 may be deleted from the proceedings. At his request, respondent No.3 is deleted as such.
Notice. Mr. Ranjan Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General and Mr. Virbahadur Verma, learned Standing Counsel, take notice on behalf of
respondents No.1 and 2, respectively.
The learned counsels on both sides submit that the issue involved in this petition is identical to the issues that arose for consideration in various
petitions before this Court. Two such petitions are CWP No.849 of 2019, titled Priyanka Devi Versus State of H.P. & others, decided on 10.09.2019,
vide Annexure P-3 and CWP No.4279 of 2019, titled Mukesh rana Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, decided on 19.12.2019, vide
Annexure P-4.
Hence, in view of the submissions made, the petition is disposed off in terms of the aforesaid judgments dated 10.09.2019 (Annexure P-6) and
19.12.2019 (Annexure P-4).
Pending miscellaneous applications are also disposed off.