SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(SC) 495

TARUN CHATTERJEE, H.L.DATTU
State of Himachal Pradesh – Appellant
Versus
Sada Ram – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Appellants :Naresh K. Sharma, Advocates.
For the Respondents:Suryanarayana Singh, Ms. Pragati Neekhra, Advocates.

JUDGMENT

Tarun Chatterjee, J. —

1. Leave granted.

2. The High Court, while dismissing the petition, passed the following order :-

“CMP No. 224 of 2006

Heard. We do not see any reason to interfere with the judgment of the Tribunal. The petition is dismissed.

CMP No. 332 of 2006

In view of the order passed in the main matter, this application shall also stand dismissed.”

3. In our view, the High Court, while disposing of the writ application, ought to have at least given some reasons for dismissing the same and ought to have passed a speaking and a reasoned order. Such being the position and without going into the merits of the writ petition, we set aside the impugned order and restore the writ petition and request the High Court to decide the writ petition afresh on merits.

4. The High Court is requested to dispose of the writ petition at an early date preferably within three months from the date of supply of a copy of this order to it. The impugned order is accordingly set aside. The appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above. There will be no order as to costs.

***********

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top