Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(HP) 3729
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Ajay Mohan Goel, J
Sanjay Ram – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
CWP No. 446 of 2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Amit singh Chandel
For the Respondents: Mr. Rajpal Thakur, Mr. Vishwajeet, Ms. Aanchal Singh, Mr. Anup Rattan, Ms. Swati Draik
Writ petitions concerning disputed questions of fact should be directed to competent courts for adjudication.
Headnote:This judgment pertains to a writ petition seeking verification of the petitioner's degree. The court references prior case law indicating that such matters are better suited for determination in a competent court of jurisdiction rather than through writ jurisdiction. Consequently, the petition is deemed not maintainable, with an allowance for the petitioner to seek redress in the appropriate forum. The proceedings are closed without merit observations, emphasizing prompt and compassionate processing by the relevant court. The petitioner has the freedom to approach a competent court for grievances as permitted by prior rulings.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner requests verification of degree. (Para 1) |
| 2. court determines writ petition is not suitable for dispute resolution. (Para 2) |
| 3. proceedings closed with directions for appropriate court action. (Para 3) |
…Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge Whether approved for reporting?
For the petitioner : Mr. Amit singh Chandel, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Rajpal Thakur, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1, 2 & 5.
Mr. Vishwajeet, Advocate, for respondent No.3.
Ms. Aanchal Singh, Advocate, vice Mr. Vinod Chauhan, Advocate, for respondent No.4.
Mr. Anup Rattan, Senior Advocate, with Ms. Swati Draik, Advocate, for respondent No.6. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following relief:-
“i. The respondents may kindly be directed to verify
the genuineness/validy of the degree of the petitioner keeping in view the Marksheets (Annexure P-1 (Colly))
and Degree (Annexure P-3 (Colly)) of the petitioner.”
2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties as well as learned Additional Advocate General, this Court is of the considered view that as the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in CWPIL No. 22 of 2022, dated 20.12.2024, titled Court on its own motion Vs. State of H.P. & Ors, along-with other connected matters, filed by students like the petitioner, has been pleased to hold that in such facts this Court in its writ jurisdiction is not in a position to determine disputed questions and it is left open to the students to approach the competent Court of jurisdiction for redressal of their grievance, the present petition is not maintainable, because in the light of the observations/order passed by Hon’ble Division Bench, the petitioner will have to invoke the jurisdiction of competent Court for redressal of his grievance as he is similarly situated as were the other students-petitioners, who were before the Hon’ble Division Bench.
3. Accordingly, these proceedings are closed, without any observation on merit but with liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent Court of jurisdiction for redressal of his grievance. It is observed that in the event of any such process being initiated by the petitioner, needful be done by the learned Court concerned expeditiously as well as compassionately. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.
