Himachal Pradesh High Court______________________________________________________________________ vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Ors on 15 February, 2016Author:Rajiv SharmaBench:Rajiv Sharma1




     IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

                                                            CWP No. 332 of 2016




                                                                                           .

                                    Date of decision 15. 02.2016
______________________________________________________________________
Vijay Thakur and another





                                                .....Petitioners.
                        Vs.

State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors.




                                                               of
                                                            .....Respondents.
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
Coram:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Vacation Judge
Whether approved for reporting?1
                                rt

For the petitioner:                              Mr. Jagdish Thakur, Advocate.

For the respondents:                              Mr. Varinder Chauhan, Addl. A.G., for
                                                  respondents No. 1 to 3.



                                                  Mr. Ajay Chauhan, Advocate, vice Mr.
                                                  Ashok Sharma, ASGI, for respondents
                                                  No. 4.




                                                  Mr. Sunil Mohan Goel, Advocate, vice Mr.
                                                  Raman      Jamalta,    Advocate,     for





                                                  respondent No. 5.

Rajiv Sharma, J. (Oral):Petitioners are aggrieved primarily by the issuance of

Annexure P­5, dated 7.02.2015, whereby initially stage carriage permits

have been issued to respondent No. 5 from Hamirpur to Sujanpur via

Chabutra=04RT,                  Sujanpur­Hamirpur                     via        Chabutra=04RT.           The

contention of the petitioners is that these new stage carriage permits


1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 19:43:52 :::HCHP2have been issued beyond the cluster constituted vide Annexure P­8,

dated 25.10.2013..2.                 Mr. Jagdish Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioners





submits at the Bar that the respondents are again issuing the permits,

but his clients have not been taken into confidence.3.                 Consequently, the petitioners are permitted to make




                                              of
representation to respondent No. 3, who will look into the grievance of

the petitioners and shall ensure that no new permits are issued in

breach of Anneuxure P­8, dated 25.10.2013.rt
                   With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed

of, so also the pending application(s), if any.(Rajiv Sharma)


                                                          Vacation Judge


February 15, 2016




     (bhupender)::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 19:43:52 :::HCHP