Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 2372 (HP)

Court on its own motion v. State of H. P.

2016-11-10

MANSOOR AHMAD MIR, SANDEEP SHARMA

body2016
ORDER : Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J. CMP No.9088 of 2016 By the medium of this application, applicant/respondent No.14 has sought exemption from appearing personally before this Court, as directed vide order dated 19th October, 2016. However, the Superintending Engineer, Pollution Control, Board is present in person. 2. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed, as prayed for. 3. It is stated that some of the respondents have filed the status reports and some are yet to file. The respondents who have not filed the status reports are directed to file the same within two weeks, with advance copy to the learned Amicus Curiae, enabling him to respond to all the status reports within two weeks thereafter 4. Response to the affidavit of the Drug Controller, Himachal Pradesh has been filed by the Amicus Curiae. 5. On the last date of hearing, we had directed the Director General of Police, Himachal Pradesh to remain present in person before this Court. Today, instead of remaining present in person, the Director General of Police had sent Additional Director General of Police Mr.Atul, who has stated that the Director General of Police has gone to Delhi in connection with some personal work. 6. We may remind that vide order dated 4th October, 2016, passed in COPC No.188 of 2016, titled Smt. Pratibha Kaushik vs. Shri R.D. Dhiman and another, this Court has directed the Chief Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh to ensure that the officers, who are required to remain present before the Court in terms of the Court orders, seek exemption/permission from the Court before leaving the State. It is apt to reproduce paragraph 3 of the said order hereunder: “3. The Chief Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh is directed to ensure that all those officers, who have been arrayed as party-respondents in the contempt petitions or who have to remain present before the Court in the cases on the dates fixed, have to seek exemption/permission from the Court before leaving for Delhi or outside the State. Any deviation shall be seriously viewed.” 7. The said directions passed in COPC No.188 of 2016 are restated. Mr.Anup Rattan, learned Additional Advocate General, to convey this order to the Chief Secretary, to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, for strict compliance, otherwise this Court would be constrained to initiate contempt proceedings against the erring officers/officials. 8. Any deviation shall be seriously viewed.” 7. The said directions passed in COPC No.188 of 2016 are restated. Mr.Anup Rattan, learned Additional Advocate General, to convey this order to the Chief Secretary, to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, for strict compliance, otherwise this Court would be constrained to initiate contempt proceedings against the erring officers/officials. 8. List on 22nd December, 2016. The Director General of Police, H.P. to remain present in person before this Court on the next date of hearing.