Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 752 (HP)

ATUL KUMAR v. STATE OF HP

2013-08-20

A.M.KHANWILKAR, KULDIP SINGH

body2013
JUDGEMENT A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. - 1. HEARD counsel for the parties. 2. THE relief claimed in this petition is to direct the respondents to repair/maintain the Sports Complex with high standard, keeping in view the sports activities organized thereat and to provide best facilities with sufficient number of coaches, who can train the children according to international standards of the games. The respondents in response to the writ petition have filed reply- affidavit pointing out the financial allocation for the entire State for the proposed activity to be carried out in the Sports Complex. In the affidavit filed by Mr. Kamal Sharma, Director, Youth Services and Sports, Government of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla, it is stated that the construction of shooting range established in Indira Gandhi State Sports Complex, Shimla, is almost completed by H.P. PWD and the possession thereof will be made over to the Department of Youth Services and Sports very shortly. On instructions, learned Counsel for the State states that the said process will be completed within four weeks from today. This statement is accepted. The affidavit clearly records that after the possession of the shooting range is made over to the Department of Youth Services and Sports, needful will be done for starting sports activities, in particular, regarding shooting. In this . view of the matter, nothing more is required to be done in this petition. The same is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to renew the prayer made in this petition, in the event, the authorities fail to start proper activities regarding shooting sports in the Sports Complex within a reasonable time. of 3. WE also place on record that since the favourable feasibility report for construction of two halls to provide sports facilities to the children in the locality has already been prepared, the Appropriate Authority may take suitable decision in that context and take that decision to its logical end. The assurance given by the Director in the reply-affidavit, already placed on record, is accepted. 4. THE petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any.