High CourtsSingle Bench(2021) 03 SHI CK 0062

M/s Kanwar & Partners vs State Of H.P & Others

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh · Decided on 8 March 2021

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sandeep Sharma, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 1366 Of 2021

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

18 paragraphs · 328 words

Sandeep Sharma, J

1.

Mr. Ajay Vaidya, learned Senior Additional Advocate General contends that present petition has rendered infructuous with the afflux of time and as

such, same may be disposed of accordingly.

2.

Mr. Mohan Sharma, learned counsel representing the petitioner while admitting the factum with regard to auction of the vends, contends that relief,

as prayed for, in the petition cannot be granted in the instant proceedings on account of subsequent development, but directions can be issued to the

respondent-State to comply with the directions contained in judgment dated 4th November, 2020, passed by Division Bench of this Court in CWP

No.1967 of 2020 alongwith other connected matters, whereby Division Bench of this Court while dealing with the grouse of Excise Licensees with

regard to inadequate steps taken by the State to compensate them for loss of revenue due to Covid-19, issued detailed directions to review and

reconsider the decision taken with regard to minimum guaranteed quota.

3.

Learned Senior Additional Advocate General while responding to aforesaid submission made on behalf of learned counsel for the petitioner,

contends that though directions contained in the aforesaid judgment rendered by Division Bench of this Court has been duly complied with, but

respondent-State shall have no objection in considering the case of the petitioner in the light of the aforesaid directions issued by the Division Bench of

this Court, if not already considered.

4.

Consequently, in view of the above, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent-State to consider and decide the case of

the petitioner with regard to lifting of minimum guaranteed quota in terms of directions contained in the aforesaid judgment rendered by Division

Bench of this Court, expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks. Needless to say, while doing the needful in terms of the directions,

respondents besides affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner would also pass speaking order. Pending applications, if any, also stand

disposed of.