CWP No.1132/2004. 26.04.2007 Present: Mr. Ajay Mohan Goel, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. M.S. Chandel, Advocate General with Mr. M.A. Khan and Ms. Meenakshi, Dy. As. G. for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr. K.D. Sood, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rajneesh K. Lal for respondents No.3 and 4. At the request of Mr. M.S. Chandel, learned Advocate General that a decision is likely to be taken by the State during the course of three weeks, matter is adjourned. This Court be apprised accordingly by way of supplementary affidavit about the decision taken. To come up for hearing on 23.5.2007. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge April 26, 2007. (sck). CWP No.714/2000. 26.04.2007 Present: Mr. D.N. Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Shrawan Dogra, Advocate for the respondents. Mr. D.N. Ronta submits that petitioner’s grievance has been redressed after the issuance of office order dated 22nd June, 2001. Though the grievance of the petitioner has been redressed by the respondents, the respondents are directed to grant consequential benefits accruing to the petitioner on the basis of communication dated 22nd June, 2001 (Annexure P-A/2), if not already granted within a period of one month from today. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with no order as to costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge April 26, 2007. (sck). CWP No.908/2000. 26.04.2007 Present: Mr. Bimal Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. M.S. Chandel, Advocate General with Mr. M.A. Khan and Ms. Meenakshi, Dy. As. G. for the respondents. Mr. Bimal Gupta states at bar that since the grievance of the petitioner has been redressed by the respondents, this petition has become infructuous. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of having become infructuous with no order as to costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge April 26, 2007. (sck). CWP No.1014/2002. 26.04.2007 Present: None for the petitioners. Mr. M.S. Chandel, Advocate General with Mr. M.A. Khan and Ms. Meenakshi, Dy. As. G. for the respondent No.1. Mr. Neel Kamal Sood, Advocate for respondents No. 2 and 3. At the request of learned Advocate General, the matter may come up for hearing on Monday the 30th April, 2007 to enable him to seek positive instructions, more particularly in view of Sections 5, 6 and 7 of H.P. Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act, 1982. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge April 26, 2007. (sck). CWP No.1023/2002. 26.04.2007 Present: Mr. Rakesh Jaswal, Advocate vice counsel for the petitioners. Mr. M.S. Chandel, Advocate General with Mr. M.A. Khan and Ms. Meenakshi, Dy. As. G. for the respondent No.1. Mr. Lakshay Thakur, Advocate vice counsel for respondents No. 2 to 20. Vide separate judgment of the date, the writ petition is disposed of. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge April 26, 2007. (sck). CWP No.594/2003. 26.04.2007 Present: Mr. J.R. Poswal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ajay Sood, Advocate for the respondents. During the course of arguments, Mr. Ajay Sood has brought to the notice of this Court the communication received from his client stating therein that the petitioner has already approached the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court-1, Chandigarh by way of reference bearing No.47/2005. In view of this subsequent development Mr. J.R. Poswal seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this petition to enable him to get his matter adjudicated from the Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court-I, Chandigarh. In view of the subsequent development, he is permitted to withdraw the petition. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with no order as to costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge April 26, 2007. (sck). CWP No.82-2004. 26.04.2007 Present: Mr. Dharamvir Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Anand Sharma, Advocate for the respondents No. 1 to 3. During the course of Mr. Dharamvir Sharma has prayed that to adjudicate upon this petition effectively the respondents may be directed to produce all the record of the relevant period i.e. 1977 and 1978, particularly muster rolls No.246, 207, 214,277, 21 and 226 respectively. This exercise has been undertaken at the request of the petitioner since the petitioner strenuously urged that he has completed more than 240 days in a calendar year while working under P.S.E.B. which fact has been denied before the Labour Court. The prayer is genuine and the same is allowed. The respondents are directed to produce the record as stated herein above within a period of three weeks. To come up on 23rd May, 2007. Copy dasti. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge April 26, 2007. (sck). CWP No.802-2004. 26.04.2007 Present: Ms. Bindiya Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. M.S. Chandel, Advocate General with Mr. M.A. Khan and Ms. Meenakshi Sharma, Dy. As. G. for the respondent. In view of the reply filed by the respondent, Ms. Bindiya Sharma submits at bar that though she is satisfied with the reply, but the averments made in para 4 of the reply may be treated as under-taking to ensure that the construction work is completed very-very expeditiously of 2nd phase of Civil/District/Regional Hospital, Kullu. Accordingly, this petition is disposed with the direction that the construction work of 2nd phase of Civil/District/Regional Hospital, Kullu be completed very-very expeditiously and immediately after the completion of the work, the dead house be shifted to the new building. Needless to add that the dead house to be constructed in 2nd phase of Civil/District/Regional Hospital, Kullu must be in conformity to the norms including the refrigeration. There shall be no order as to costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge April 26, 2007. (sck). CWP No.378-2004. 26.04.2007 Present: Mr. B.C. Negi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Advocate for the In view of the reply filed by the respondent, Ms. Bindiya Sharma submits at bar that though she is satisfied with the reply, but the averments made in para 4 of the reply may be treated as under-taking to ensure that the construction work is completed very-very expeditiously of 2nd phase of Civil/District/Regional Hospital, Kullu. Accordingly, this petition is disposed with the direction that the construction work of 2nd phase of Civil/District/Regional Hospital, Kullu be completed very-very expeditiously and immediately after the completion of the work, the dead house be shifted to the new building. Needless to add that the dead house to be constructed in 2nd phase of Civil/District/Regional Hospital, Kullu must be in conformity to the norms including the refrigeration. There shall be no order as to costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge April 26, 2007. (sck).