Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2026 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. High Court Of Himachal Pradesh/
  4. 2024/
  5. July

The District Collector Cum Deputy Commissioner vs. Ram Prakash Bhardwaj and Others

Decided on 31 July 2024• Citation: CMPMO/248/2024• High Court of Himachal Pradesh
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                     IN THE HIGH  COURT  OF HIMACHAL   PRADESH,   SHIMLA          
                                                     CMPMO  No.248 of 2024        
                                                 Date of decision: 31.07.2024     
                    The District Collect-cum-Deputy                               
                    Commissioner, Shimla.                      ...Petitioner.     
                                       Versus                                     
                    Ram  Prakash Bhardwaj & Ors.            ...Respondents.       
                    Coram:                                                        
                    Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge.                         
                    Whether approved for reporting?1                              
                    For the petitioner :     Ms.  Leena   Guleria, Deputy         
                                             Advocate General.                    
                    For the respondents :    Mr. Paras  Ram,  Advocate, for       
                                             respondent No.1.                     
                    Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge                                      
                              The  State  is aggrieved  against the  order        
                    12.03.2024, whereby its right to file written statement has   
                    been closed.                                                  
                    2.        Heard learned counsel on both sides.                
                    3.        The impugned  order records that despite giving     
                    opportunities to the petitioner over a period of six months,  
                    the written statement was not filed by the State/defendant.   
                    Accordingly, its right to file the same was closed.           
                    4.        In view of the callous attitude shown by the        
                    petitioner-State (defendant) in not filing the  written       
                    1                                                             
                         Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes

                                                -2-                               
                    statement, the impugned order striking off defence of the     
                    petitioner cannot be said to be suffering from any illegality.
                    5.        Learned Deputy Advocate General contended that      
                    there was a communication gap between the office of learned   
                    Assistant District Attorney, Kinnaur at Rampur and the        
                    competent authority, in respect of filing of the written      
                    statement. It was on account of this reason that the written  
                    statement could not  be filed. Learned Deputy Advocate        
                    General prayed for grant of one more opportunity for filing   
                    the written statement. This prayer has not been seriously     
                    opposed by the learned counsel for the respondents.           
                              Taking a holistic view of the matter, keeping in    
                    mind the submissions made by the learned Deputy Advocate      
                    General and  in  the interest of justice, it is deemed        
                    appropriate to grant the petitioner one more opportunity to   
                    file the written statement. However, this shall be subject to 
                    the payment  of costs of Rs.2,500/- to the respondents/       
                    plaintiffs. The cost shall be paid by the petitioner/ defendant
                    before the learned Trial Court on the next date of hearing    
                    when  the written statement shall also be filed. It is made   

                                                -3-                               
                    clear that this shall be the final opportunity made available 
                    to the petitioner for the aforesaid purpose.                  
                              The parties, through their learned counsel, are     
                    directed to appear  before the learned Trial Court  on        
                    28.08.2024. It is also clarified that if the written statement is
                    not filed and the cost is not paid on the next date, the      
                    learned Trial Court shall proceed further in the matter in    
                    accordance with law.                                          
                              Accordingly, this petition is disposed of. Pending  
                    miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed
                    of.                                                           
                                                      Jyotsna Rewal Dua           
                    31th July, 2024                         Judge                 
                       (    )                                                     
                       Pardeep