IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. C.W.P. No. 7545 of 2011-I. Decided on 2nd December, 2011. _____________________________________________________ Surender Thakur and another. …Petitioners. -Versus- Himachal Pradesh Financial Corporation Ltd. & others. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. __________________________________________________________ For the petitioners. : Mr. Rupinder Singh, Advocate. For respondents No. 1 and 2. : Mr. Ajay Sharma, Advocate. For respondents No. 3 and 4. : Mr. Vikas Rathore, Deputy Advocate General. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): Petitioners are aggrieved by the issuance of notice (Annexure P-5) under the Public Money (Recovery) Act, 1973). The petitioners have not filed any reply to the same. In other words, the writ petition is pre-mature. However, in the interest of justice, the petitioners are permitted to file reply(s) to notice (Annexure P-5) within a period of four weeks from today. Thereafter, it shall be open to the respondents to proceed with matter in accordance with law. It shall also be open to the petitioners to mention the case law in the reply(s). Mr. Ajay Sharma, learned counsel for respondents No. 1 and 2 submits that till the reply(s) and decision is taken in the matter, no penal/coercive orders shall be passed against the petitioners. 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?. No. - 2 - 2. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge December 02, 2011. (bhupender) - 3 - `