|
Annexure—“A”
Officers Empowered to
execute Contracts and Assurances of property
made in exercise of the Executive Power of the
Government
LAW DEPARTMENT
NOTIFICATION
Shimla-2, the 25th
January, 1971
No. LR.
107/468/54-III.—In
exercise of the powers conferred by clause (1)
of Article 299 of the Constitution of India, the
Governor of Himachal Pradesh, hereby directs
that the under mentioned contracts and
assurances of property made in the exercise of
the executive power of the Government of
Himachal Pradesh may be executed on its behalf
as follows :—
I.
In the case of all Departments of the
Government of Himachal Pradesh including their
attached and subordinate offices, Himachal
Pradesh Public Service Commission,
Himachal Pradesh Vidhan Sabha Secretariat and
Governor’s Secretariat :—
A.
1. Contracts and other
instruments relating to advances granted to
Government servants for the purchase of motor
cars, motor cycles, cycles, or houses or for
building houses, or for medical attendance and
treatment or for festivals, marriages, funerals
or other ceremonies or for relief against
floods, etc. or advances of pay and travelling
allowance on transfer and tour, or advances of
pay to persons proceeding on deputation abroad,
or advances in respect of the Travel Concession
Scheme during regular leave; by the authority
sanctioning the advance.
2. Contracts
and other instruments in respect of
accommodation provided in rented buildings (i)
for catering in hostels and tiffin rooms (ii)
for the protection of conveyances belonging to
the staff working in such rented buildings and
(iii) for co-operative
stores/societies/banks/canteens run by employees
associations/ societies; by the Head of
Department/Office which is in occupation of the
building and is responsible for the payment of
municipal taxes etc.
3. Indemnity bonds
relating to conveyance and transport at
Government expense of families and personnel
effects of Government servants who die while in
service, by the Head of Officer under whom the
deceased Government servant last served.
4. Contracts and
other instruments relating to the—
(i) payment of
advance subscriptions for the purchase of
newspapers, magazines, periodicals etc.;
(ii) purchase,
supply and conveyance or carriage of materials,
store and machinery;
by the Head of Office
concerned.
B.
1. Surety bonds relating to the grant or
pension to Government servants or provisional
pension to displaced Government servants, by
the authorities sanctioning the pension or
provisional pension.
2. Security bonds
of Cashiers and other Government servants and/or
their sureties to secure the due execution of an
office or the due accounting for money or other
property received by virtue thereof, by the
Head of office concerned.
C.
Pledge and release of Postal
Savings Certificate and Post Office Savings Bank
Accounts as security ; by only those Gazetted
Officers of the Himachal Pradesh Government who
for due performance of their duties, are
required to accept and release securities.
D.
All instruments appointing
Attorneys and Counsel, by the Officers empowered
to authenticate orders and other instruments
under clause (2) of Article 166 of the
Constitution.
II.
As regards contracts etc.,
not hereinbefore specified :—
1. All deeds and
instruments relating to matters other than those
specified in item 2 to
[11]
below by a Secretary to the Himachal Pradesh
Government.
[2.
Contracts and other instruments relating to
matters connected with the administration of
forests and the business of the Forest
Department, but not relating to the purchase or
sale or permanent acquisition of land; by the
conservator
of Forests irrespective of the amount or value.]
[3.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX]
4. In the case of
the Public Works Department
[(including
the Department of Multipurpose Projects and
Power)].
(a) All instruments
relating to purchase, supply and conveyance or
carriage of materials, stores, machinery etc.;
(b) all instruments
relating to the execution of works of all kinds
connected with buildings, bridges, roads, canal,
tanks, reservoirs, and embankments and
instruments relating to the construction of
water works and the execution of machinery ;
(c) bonds of auctioneers
and security bonds for due performance and
completion of works ; and
(d) security bonds for
the performance of their duties by Government
servants whom the officers specified below have
power to appoint;
by Chief Engineer,
Superintending Engineers, Divisional Officers,
Sub-Divisional officers, Assistant Executive
Engineers, Assistant Elect. Engineers
and Assistant Engineers.
[4-A.
Contracts and other instruments relating to
auction of fruit crops of the Government
orchards of Horticulture Department, Himachal
Pradesh :—
(a) if the
amount or value does not exceed Rs. 5,000 by
the Horticulture Department Officer or any other
Gazetted Officer-incharge of the District of
Horticultural work ;
(b) if the
amount or value does not exceed Rs. 25,000 by
the Deputy Director Horticulture, Himachal
Pradesh ;
(c) if the
amount or value exceeds Rs. 25,000 but does not
exceed Rs. 50,000 by the Director of
Horticulture.]
5.
(a) Contracts and other instruments
connected with ferries, dues for grazing cattle
on places other than forests, fisheries, nazul,
buildings, spontaneous products and minerals,
execution of minor works not under the Public
Works Department ; and for the supply of
necessary depots ;
(b) Contracts and other instruments in
matters connected with the lease or sale of land
;
(c) Contracts relating to any matters
falling within his ordinary jurisdiction ;
(d) Instruments of free grants of
proprietary rights in land ;
(e) Instruments whereby property is
mortgaged to the Govern-ment as security for a
loan ; and
(f) Instruments of exchange of land ;
by the Deputy Commissioner
concerned or a Secretary or an Under Secretary
to the Government of Himachal Pradesh.
6. Contracts for the supply
of articles for use in jails; or regarding the
sale of articles manufactured in Jails; by
the Inspector General of Prisons, Himachal
Pradesh.
7. Contracts and other
instruments for the supply of stores, clothing
etc., by the Heads of Departments concerned.
8. Contracts for banking
premises and engagement of private vehicles;
by the Regional Managers of Himachal Pradesh
Government Transport.
9. Contracts and other
instruments relating to matters connected with
their respective departments (including mining
leases); by the Head of the Department
concerned.
10. Contracts and instruments
relating to lease of premises for office purpose
when the annual rent does not exceed Rs. 50,000;
by the Head of Office.
[11.
Lease deeds in respect of plots in the
Industrial area in Himachal Pradesh; by the
[(Director
of Industries)].
[12.
Contracts and execution of instruments of leases
relating to Government land by the Agriculture
Department :
Whereas any Government land
has been leased out or handed over by the
Agriculture Department to the Himachal Pradesh
Agriculture Marketing Board or to a Market
Committee in the State of Himachal Pradesh for
setting up a regulated market, marketing yard or
sub yard, the Secretary (Agriculture) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh shall, for and on
behalf of the Government of Himachal Pradesh,—
(a)
authorise the functionary of the said Board, or
as the case may be, of the Market Committee, to
further lease out the plots in such a regulated
market, marketing-yard or sub-yard and to
execute all instruments and contracts in respect
of such plots, and
(b) issue
special power of attorney in favour of any
functionary of the said Board, or as the case
may be, of the market committee, to pursue and
defend cases relating to such land in courts.]
III.
Notwithstanding anything hereinbefore contained,
any contract or assurances of property relating
to any matter whatsoever may be executed by a
Secretary or a Joint Secretary or a Deputy
Secretary or an Under Secretary to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh in the
appropriate Department and in the case of Vidhan
Sabha Secretariat; by the Secretary or Under
Secretary , Himachal Pradesh Vidhan Sabha
and in the case of Himachal Pradesh Public
Service Commission; by the Secretary of the
Commission and in the case of Governor’s
Secretariat; by the Secretary to the
Governor.
IV.
Where any business of any
department is, by virtue of reorganisation
otherwise, transferred to any other department,
whether existing or new, references in this
notification to the department from which such
business is transferred, shall, in relation to
such business, be construed as references to the
department to which it has been transferred.
Explanation.—In
this paragraph “Department” means any
Department, Secretariat or Office of the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
(R.H.P., dated 6-3-1971, p. 347-348)
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
NOTIFICATIONS
Shimla-2, the 25th January, 1971
No. LR-107-420/54.—
In exercise of the powers vested in him under
rules 1 and 2 of the Order XXVII of the Code of
Civil Procedure, and all other powers enabling
him in this behalf, the Governor, Himachal
Pradesh is pleased to authorise all the
Collectors of Districts in Himachal Pradesh, all
Secretaries, Joint Secretaries Deputy
Secretaries, Under Secretaries,
heads
of Departments of Himachal Pradesh and also the
Conservators of Forests and Superintending
Engineers in Himachal Pradesh to act for the
State of Himachal Pradesh, to sign and verify
plaints and written statements in suits by or
against the State of Himachal Pradesh and also
to act for the State of Himachal Pradesh in
respect of any judicial proceedings. This
notification shall not effect any act already
done on the basis of the previous notifications
and all such acts done under previous
notification shall be deemed to have been done
under this notification.
Sd/-
(JOSEPH
DINA NATH)
Under Secretary (Judicial) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
________
Shimla-2, the 3rd July,
1978
No.
LLR-E(9)2/76.—In
exercise of the powers conferred by clause (1)
of Article 299 of the Constitution of India, the
Governor, Himachal Pradesh hereby directs that
agreements/ contracts made with the firms for
the supply of stores in various Government
Departments, in exercise of the executive powers
of the Government of Himachal Pradesh, may be
executed on his behalf by the Additional
Controller of Stores, H. P. Shimla.
Sd/-
(J. C. MALHOTRA)
Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal
Pradesh.
(R.H.P.,
dated 15-7-1978, p. 663)
f'keyk&171 002] 1 Qjojh] 1980
la0 ,y0 ,y0 vkj0&bZ
¼9½2@75-&&Hkkjrh;
lafo/kku ds vuqPNsn 299 ds [k.M ¼1½
}kjk iznRr 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, jkT;iky]
fgekpy izns'k ,rn~}kjk funsZ'k nsrs gSa fd
fgekpy izns'k dh dk;Zdkjh 'kfDr dk iz;ksx djrs
gq;s] m|ksx foHkkx ds ftyk m|ksx dsUnzksa ds
egkizcU/kdksa }kjk] bdjkjukesa@iV~Vk foys[kkfn
jkT;iky egksn; dh vksj ls vius&vius {ks=kf/kdkj
esa fu"ikfnr fd;s tk;saxs A
gLrk{kfjr@&
¼t; pUn eYgks=k½
lfpo
¼fof/k½]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
(R.H.P., dated 22-3-1980, p.
371)
—————
Shimla-2, the 3rd
December, 1980
No.
LLR-E(9)2/76.—In
exercise of the powers conferred by clause (1)
of Article 299 of the Constitution of India and
all other powers enabling him in this behalf,
the Governor, Himachal Pradesh is pleased to
declare that all deeds out-sides India shall be
executed on behalf of the State of Himachal
Pradesh by the Indian Ambassador/Economic
Minister in United States of America and in
other countries by the Indian Ambassadors,
Charged Affairs or High Commissioners only in
countries where they have been accredited.
Sd/-
(J. C. MALHOTRA)
Secretary (Law) to the
Government of
Himachal Pradesh.
(R.H.P. Extra., dated
10-12-1980, p. 1406)
—————
Shimla-2, the 7th August,
1982
No.
LLR-E(9)2/76.—In
exercise of the powers conferred by clause (1)
of Article 299 of the Constitution of India, the
Governor, Himachal Pradesh is pleased to
authorise All Divisional Forest Officers, Soil
Conservation Divisions/Assistant Soil
Conservation Officers in the Department of Soil
Conservation, Himachal Pradesh to execute
agreements/instruments relating to the Soil
Conservation Schemes, with their respective
jurisdiction, to be made in exercise of the
executive powers of the State Government of
Himachal Pradesh.
This
supersedes the Himachal Pradesh Government
Notifications Nos. LLR-E(9)2/76, dated 22nd
September, 1976, LLR-E(9)2/76, dated 22nd
January, 1977 and LLR-E(9)2/78, dated 4th
February, 1981.
LAW DEPARTMENT
NOTIFICATION
Shimla-2, the 27th August, 1987
No. LR-107-420/54.—In
continuation of this department notification of
even number dated 25th January, 1971,
and in exercise of the powers vested in him
under rules 1 and 2 of the Order XXVII of the
Code of Civil Procedure,1908 and all other
powers enabling him in this behalf, the
Governor, Himachal Pradesh is pleased to
authorise the Additional Conservators, Himachal
Pradesh to act for the State of Himachal
Pradesh, to sign and verify plaints and written
statements in suits by or against the State of
Himachal Pradesh and also to act for the State
of Himachal Pradesh in respect of any judicial
proceedings.
________
(Issued and published in
Hindi in R.H.P., dated 3-7-1999, p. 1098).
LAW DEPARTMENT
NOTIFICATION
Shimla‑171002, the 11th
June, 1999
No.
LLR‑E(9)‑2/76.—In continuation to this
department notification No. LR‑107/420‑54, dated
27-8-1987 and in exercise of powers vested in
her under rules 1 and 2 of the Order XXVII of
the Code of Civil Procedure, the Governor,
Himachal Pradesh is pleased to authorise the
Chief Conservator of Forests (Project), Himachal
Pradesh, Director, Indo‑German Changar Project,
Director, IWDP (Hills), Kandi and Director, H.
P. State Land Use Board to act for the State of
Himachal Pradesh, to sign and verify plaints and
written statements in any suit by or against the
State of Himachal Pradesh and also to act for
the State of Himachal Pradesh in respect of any
judicial proceeding.
Sd/-
(RAMESHWAR SHARMA)
Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal
Pradesh
‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑
(R.H.P., dated 3-7-1999, p. 1098)
_________
LAW DEPARTMENT
NOTIFICATION
Shimla-2, the 14th March, 2000
No. LLR-E(9)-2/76.—In
continuation to this department notification
No. LR-107/420-54 dated 25-1-1971, and in
exercise of powers vested in him under rules 1
and 2 of the Order XXVII of the Code of Civil
Procedure, the Governor, Himachal Pradesh is
pleased to authorise the State Geologist and the
Geologists of the Industries Department of
Himachal Pradesh to act for the State of
Himachal Pradesh, to sign and verify plaints and
written statements/replication/rejoinder etc. in
suits by or against the State of Himachal
Pradesh and also to act for the State of
Himachal Pradesh in respect of any judicial
proceedings especially when the Director of
Industries, Himachal Pradesh is not a respondent
in cases pertaining to Geological Wing of the
State.
By order,
(RAMESHWAR SHARMA)
Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal
Pradesh.
(R.H.P.,
dated 1-4-2000, p. 648)
_________
LAW DEPARTMENT
NOTIFICATION
Shimla‑171002, the 10th
January, 2001
No. LLR‑E(9)‑2/76.—In
continuation of this Department Notification
No. LR‑107/420/54, dated 25‑1‑1971, and in
exercise of the powers vested in him under rules
1 and 2 of the Order XXVII of the Code of Civil
Procedure, the Governor, Himachal Pradesh is
pleased to authorise the Joint Directors and
Deputy Directors of Animal Husbandry and
[Technical
Education, Vocational and Industrial Training
Departments] to act for the State of Himachal
Pradesh to sign and verify plaints and written
statements in suits by or against the State of
Himachal Pradesh in respect of any judicial
proceedings in the courts up to the District
level only.
By order,
(RAMESHWAR SHARMA)
LR-cum-Secretary
(Law) to the
Government of
Himachal Pradesh.
(R.H.P., dated 28-4-2001 p.120)
___________
LAW DEPARTMENT
NOTIFICATION
Shimla-2, the 6th May,
2002
No. LLR-E(9)-2/76.—In
continuation of this department notification No.
LR-107/420/54, dated 25-1-1971 and in exercise
of the powers vested in him under rules 1 and 2
of the Order XXVII of the Code of Civil
Procedure, the Governor of Himachal Pradesh is
pleased to authorise all the Chief Medical
Officers in Himachal Pradesh to act for the
State of Himachal Pradesh and to sign and verify
the plaint/written statement or reply in suits
by or against the State of Himachal Pradesh
before the law courts upto district level only
in the cases relating to the Districts of their
posting.
By order,
(RAMESHWAR SHARMA)
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to the
Government
of Himachal Pradesh.
(R.H.P., dated 15-6-2002, p. 461)
__________
[Authoritative English
text of this Department Notification No. LLR-E
(9)-2/76 dated 21st April, 2003 as
required under clause (3) of Article 348 of the
Constitution of India].
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL
PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
NOTIFICATION
Shimla-171002, the 21st
April, 2003
No. LLR-E
(9)-2/76.—In continuation of this Department
Notification No. LR-107/420/54 dated 25-1-1971
and in exercise of the powers vested in him
under Rules 1 and 2 of the Order XXVII of the
Code of Civil Procedure, the Governor, Himachal
Pradesh is pleased to authorise S.D.O.
(Civil-Rural)-cum- Settlement Officer
(Sales), Shimla and S.D.O. (Civil)-cum-Settlement
Officer (Sales) Kangra to act for the State of
Himachal Pradesh to sign and verify the
plaints/written statements in suits by or
against the State of Himachal Pradesh in various
civil and revenue courts upto District level in
the cases relating to Evacuee properties falling
under their respective jurisdiction.
By
order,
(J. L.
GUPTA)
LR-cum-Secretary
(Law) to the
Government of Himachal
Pradesh.
[Authoritative English text of this
Department Notification No. LLR-E(9)-2/76
dated 19-1-2005 as required under clause (3) of
Article 348 of the Constitution of India].
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
NOTIFICATION
Shimla-171 002, the 19th January,
2005
No. LLR-E(9)-2/76.—In
continuation of this Department Notification
No. LR-107/420/54 dated 25-1-1971 and in
exercise of the powers vested in him under Rules
1 and 2 of the Order XXVII of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 as amended from time to time,
the Governor, Himachal Pradesh is pleased to
authorise the Deputy Director of Agriculture
Department and District Agriculture Officers of
Shimla and Solan districts of Himachal Pradesh
to act, make the statement, sign and verify the
plaints/written statements, applications,
replies or execute Vakalatnamas in the Suits by
or against the State of Himachal Pradesh before
the Hon’ble High Courts and the Courts
subordinate thereto in the following pending
cases:—
1. CMP No. 179/2004 titled Sh. Daulat
Ram Verma Vs. State of H. P. and another.
1. Arbitration case titled State of
H. P. Vs. Sh Anant Ram Negi
2. Arbitration case titled State of
H. P. Vs. Jai Co-operative Society
3. Arbitration case titled State of
H. P. Vs. Karam Chand
4. Arbitration case titled State of
H. P. Vs. Krishna Devi
5. Arbitration case titled State of
H. P. Vs. Salig Ram
By order
,
(SURINDER SINGH THAKUR)
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
[Authoritative English text of this
Department Notification No. LLR-E(9)-2/76,
dated 8th August, 2005 as required under
clause (3) of Article 348 of the Constitution of
India].
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
NOTIFICATION
Shimla-171 002, the 11th August ,
2005
No. LLR-E(9)-2/76.—In
continuation of this Department Notification of
even number dated 19-1-2005 and in exercise of
the powers vested in him under Rules 1 and 2 of
the Order XXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure,
1908 as amended from time to time, the Governor,
Himachal Pradesh is pleased to authorise the
Deputy Director of Agriculture Department and
District Agriculture Officer of Shimla district
of Himachal Pradesh to act, make the statement,
sign and verify the plaints/written statements,
applications, replies or execute Vakalatnamas in
the suits by or against the State of Himachal
Pradesh before the Courts upto District level
only in pending Arbitration case titled State
of H. P. Versus Ganesh Dutt, with
immediate effect.
By order,
(SURINDER SINGH THAKUR)
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
—————
Most
Immediate
No. LLR-E(6)1/86-A
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
The LR-cum-Secretary
(Law) to the
Government of Himachal
Pradesh.
To
1. All the Secretaries/Joint Secretaries/
Deputy Secretaries/Under Secretaries,
to the Government of Himachal Pradesh.
2.
All Heads of Departments in Himachal
Pradesh.
3.
All the Deputy Commissioners in Himachal
Pradesh.
Shimla-2, the 28th June, 1989
Subject.—Conduct
of cases before the Arbitrators by Government
Pleaders.
Sir,
In continuation of this
Department Memo. of even number, dated the 2nd
June, 1989 to the address to all District
Attorneys/Asstt. District Attorneys-cum-Public
Prosecutors/Asstt. Public Prosecutors, Lahaul &
Spitti/Kinnaur, on the subject cited above, I
am directed to say that some time
representatives of the concerned Administrative
Departments/Heads of Departments contact the
Government pleaders for appearance before the
arbitrator hardly one or two days before the
date is fixed for hearing in the court of
Arbitrator with the result that the Government
pleaders are facing difficulties in representing
the interest of the State Government for want of
sufficient time to study the facts of the case
thoroughly.
2. You are, therefore,
requested that whenever a case is referred to
Arbitrator for arbitration you should contact
the Government pleader alongwith relevant
record/documents immediately in order to brief
him in the matter and to place the case of the
Government before the Arbitrator.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(J. S. RANA)
Under Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
—————
No. LLR-E(6)1/86-A
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
LR-cum-Secretary
(Law) to the
Government of
Himachal Pradesh.
To
1. The District Attorney-cum-Public
Prosecutors,
Shimla/Mandi/Nahan/Una/Kangra at Dharamshala/
Hamirpur/Chamba.
2. Assistant District
Attorney-cum-Public Prosecutors,
Solan/Bilaspur/Kullu.
3. The Assistant Public
Prosecutors,
Lahaul & Spiti at
Kullu/Kinnaur.
Dated
Shimla-2, the 30th April, 1991
Subject.—
Defence of Government of India cases in the
courts.
MEMORANDUM
Continuation of this
department’s memo. of even No. dated 27-12-1988,
on the subject cited above.
2. It has again come to the notice
of this department that some of the District
Attorneys/A.D.A’s do not put in appearance in
the concerned Court on behalf of the Union of
India, when asked to do so by the department
concerned for want of permission of this
department in this behalf. Consequently the
Union of India is not represented on the date of
hearing and its interests are adversely affected
as a result of non-appearance on its behalf .
You are, therefore, again instructed to
undertake the defence of the cases on behalf of
the Union of India as and when asked to do so by
the department concerned and should not insist
for instructions as such from this department.
3. On the conclusion of the cases,
copies of the judgments and decrees should
invariably be sent direct to the concerned
department of Central Government well in time
under intimation to this department. While
forwarding counsel fee bill to this department
for the assessment of the fee on the conclusion
of each case, the nature of the case,
jurisdictional values of the case and the
quantum of the work done by you may also be
intimated to this department and should be
supported with the attendance certificates of
the concerned court.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(A. L. VAIDYA)
Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
__________
vR;ko';d
la0% ,y0 ,y0 vkj0&bZ
¼9½5@90
fgekpy izns'k ljdkj
fof/k foHkkx
izs"kd %
fof/k ijke'kZnkrk ,oa lfpo
¼fof/k½]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
izsf"kr
leLr ftyk U;k;oknh@lgk;d
ftyk U;k;oknh@lgk;d yksd vfHk;kstd] ykgkSy o
fLifr] dqYyw@fdUukSj] fgekpy izns'k A
f'keyk&171 002] 01 ebZ] 1991
fo"k;-&&fnokuh ekeyksa esa fofHkUu U;k;ky;ksa
esa jkT; ljdkj dh vksj ls le>kSrs dh izfØ;k esa
vf/kdkjA
Kkiu%
gky gh esa v/kksgLrk{kfjr ds uksfVl
esa yk;k x;k gS fd fnokuh ekeyksa esa tgka
le>kSrs dh izfØ;k (Compromise)
U;k;ky;ksa esa dh tkrh gS vkSj ,sls ekeyksa esa
ljdkj ,d Ik{k gks rks cgq/kk ;g irk ugha pyrk fd
ljdkj dh vksj ls fdl vf/kdkjh dks le>kSsrk djus
dk vf/kdkj gksxk rkfd le>kSsrk okrkZ ;fn lQy
gks rks le>ksSrk fu.kZ; dkuwuh rkSj ij ykxw fd;k
tk ldsA
2- ,sls ekeyks esa tc dHkh Hkh
le>kSrk okrkZ dk fu.kZ; fy;k tkrk gS rks vDlj
lEcfU/kr iz'kklfud foHkkx ds lfpo dks foRr
foHkkx rFkk fof/k foHkkx dh lykg ysus ds mijkUr
gh dksbZ fu.kZ; ysuk gksrk gS fd fdl izdkj dk
le>kSrk jkT; ljdkj dh vksj ls U;k;ky; esa
izLrqr fd;k tk, rkfd lQyrk feyus ij le>kSrk
dkuwwuu ykxw fd;k tk ldsA
3- vr% Hkfo"; esa tc Hkh
fdlh U;k;ky; esa ljdkj dh vksj ls le>kSrs dh
izfdz;k dk izLrko gks rks fdlh Hkh ,sls vf/kdkjh
dks le>kSrk U;k;ky; ds Ik{k izLrqr u fd;k tk, tc
rd fd mlds ikl fyf[kr :Ik eas le>kSrs djus dk
vf/kdkj iz'kklfud foHkkx ds lfpo }kjk miyC/k u
gksA
4- d`Ik;k vius v/khuLFk leLr
ftyk U;k;koknh@lgk;d yksd vfHk;kstdksa dks bl
lEcU/k eas vko';d funsZ'k tkjh djsaA
5- d`Ik;k ikorh HkstsaA
la0% ,y0 ,y0 vkj0&bZ
¼9½5@90
fnukad f'keyk&2] 01 ebZ]
1991
izfrfyfi lwpukFkZ ,oa vko';d dk;Zokgh gsrq
izssf"kr dh tkrh gS %&
1- leLr lfpo] fgekpy izns'k
ljdkjA
2- leLr foHkkxk/;{k] fgekpy
izns'k A
3- leLr mik;qDr] fgekpy izns'k A
4- egkf/koDrk] fgekpy izns'k A
5- la;qDr funs'kd
¼vfHk;kstu½
fgekpy izns'k] f'keyk&2 dks muds i= la0
ts-Mh-ih-vkj-
(Inspection)
@90&881] fnukad 11&3&1991 ds lUnHkZ esa izsf"kr
A
gLrk@&
¼,0
,y0 oS|k½
lfpo
¼fof/k½]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
Personal Attention
No. LLR-E(9)5/90
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
The Chief Secretary,
to the Government of Himachal
Pradesh
To
1. All the Financial
Commissioners
to the Government of
Himachal Pradesh.
2. All the Commissioners-cum-Secretaries
to the Government of
Himachal Pradesh.
3. All the Secretaries to
the Government of Himachal Pradesh.
Shimla-2, the 24th July, 1991
Subject
.—Conduct of State Cases in various courts.
MEMO
As you are aware, various
types of litigation, i.e. civil,
criminal, revenue or miscellaneous in nature
against and by the Government is pending in
various courts of the State. It has come to the
notice of the Government that many a times,
because of default on the part of the
Administrative Departments, the Government
Counsel defending in various courts have to cut
a sorry figure in the court while defending the
State interest and oftenly the concerned
Administrative Department does not follow
properly proceedings pending in the court,
resulting in not only less but un-necessary
adverse orders against the State which can
easily be avoided. The filing of pleadings on
behalf of the State invariably is delayed for
lack of proper co-operation and sometimes on
account of this slackess on the part of the
Administrative Department, the evidence on
behalf of the State is not examined in time and
in such circumstances the State is burdened with
un-necessary costs. There are number of
instances where defence has been struck off for
not filing the written statement and reply and
further non-production of the record and
witnesses and that sometimes State cases are
dismissed in default or ex parte orders
are passed for want of proper co-operation by
the concerned Administrative Department. All
these shortcomings can easily be avoided in case
the Administrative Department takes interests in
rendering the necessary co-operation to the
Government Counsel.
2. You are, therefore,
directed that whenever a notice is received by
the Administrative Department from a court of
law or Administrative Department has to move a
court of law in any case, a responsible officer
who is well conversant with the record and facts
of the case should be made responsible and
entrusted with the entire cases who alone should
contact the Government Counsel and brief him not
only at the very onset of the case but can every
hearing till final disposal of the case.
3. You are, further
directed that in case such an officer of the
Administrative Department was found wanting in
discharge of his aforesaid duties he should be
made personally liable for any lapse committed
in this behalf.
4. The above said
directions be brought to the notice of all the
Heads of Department under our control for strict
compliance under intimation to the undersigned,
at the earliest.
5. The receipt of this letter be also
acknowledged.
Sd/-
(M. S. MUKHERJEE)
Chief Secretary
to the Government of Himachal Pradesh.
_________
la0 ,y0 ,y0 vkj0&bZ
¼9½3@86
fgekpy izns'k ljdkj
fof/k foHkkx
izs"kd %
fof/k ijke'kZnkrk ,oa lfpo
¼fof/k½]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
izsf"kr%
1- ftyk U;k;oknh]
f'keyk@e.Mh@ukgu@muk@dkaxM+k fLFkr
/keZ'kkyk@gehjiqj@pEckA
2- mi ftyk U;k;oknh]
lksyu@fcykliqj@dqYywA
3- lgk;d ftyk U;k;oknh]
ykgkSy o fLifr fLFkr dqYyw
@fdUukSj fLFkr fjdkaxfivksA
fnukad f'keyk&171 002] tuojh] 1992
fo"k;-&&fofHkUu U;k;ky;ksa esa jkT; ljdkj ls
lEcfU/kr py jgs eqdn~neksa ckjsA
Kkiu%
Eqk>s
mijksDr fo"k; ij] eq[; lfpo] fgekpy izns'k ljdkj
ds Ik= la[;k% ,y0 ,y0 vkj0 bZ0¼9½
5@90]
fnukad 24 tqykbZ] 1991] tks fd leLr iz'kklfud
lfpoksa] fgekpy izns'k ljdkj vkfn dks izssf"kr
gS] dh izfrfyfi vkidks lwpukFkZ ,oa vko';d
dk;Zokgh gsrq Hkstus dk funs'k gqvk gSA
2- bl izlax esa vkidks lwfpr
fd;k tkrk gS fd gky gh esa lfpo
¼fof/k½
ds uksfVl esa ;g f'kdk;r vkbZ gS fd lEcfU/kr
foHkkxksa ds vf/kdkjh nhokuh ekeykssa esa fof/k
vf/kdkfj;ksa dks iw.kZ lg;ksx ugha ns jgs gSa
ftlds ifj.kkeLo:Ik U;k;ky;ksa esa ljdkj ds
lEcfU/kr ekeyksa esa fodV fLFkfr mRiUu gks jgh
gSA vr% ;g ckr lqfuf'pr dh tk, fd Hkfo"; esa vki
foHkkx dks iw.kZ lgk;ksx nsa vkSj ;fn fdlh ekeys
esa lEcfU/kr foHkkx dk ftEesokj vf/kdkjh iw.kZ
lg;ksx ughs nsrk gS rks rqqjUr mldh lwpuk eq[;
lfpo] fgekpy izns'k ljdkj ;k lfpo
¼fof/k½]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkj dks nsa rkfd lEcfU/kr
vf/kdkfj;ksa ds fo:} vuq'kklukRed dk;Zokgh dh tk
ldsA blds vfrfjDr ;g Hkh lqfuf'pr djsa fd nhokuh
ekeyksa esa lEcfU/kr foHkkx dks ftEesokj
vf/kdkjh izR;sd lquokbZ ds fnu rFkk vafre
fu.kZ; rd fof/k vf/kdkjh ds lkFk U;k;ky; esa
mifLFkr jgsxkA
;fn ljdkj ds vkns'kksa dh vgosyuk dh
xbZ rks ,slk vf/kdkjh O;fDrxr :Ik ls ftEesokj
gksxkA
3- d`i;k bu fgnk;rksa dks vius
v/khuLFk leLr fof/k vf/kdkfj;ksa ds /;ku esa
yk;k tk,A
4- d`Ik;k bl Ik= dh ikorh
HkstsaA
gLrk@&
mi lfpo
¼fof/k½]
fgekpy
izns'k ljdkjA
IMMEDIATE
No. LLR-E(9)3/88
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
A. L.
Vaidya,
LR-cum-Secretary
(Law) to the
Government
of Himachal Pradesh.
To
1. All the
Administrative Secretaries
to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
2.
All the Head of Departments, Himachal
Pradesh.
. Dated
Shimla-2, the 17th June, 1992
Subject.—Defending
of State Government cases in the Supreme Court
of India—instructions reg.
Sir,
I am directed to say that it has
come to the notice of the State Government that
most of the departments are not attending
properly to the cases pertaining to litigation
in the Supreme Court of India to safeguard the
interest of the State Government. This requires
lot of improvement and regular attention of
Government Departments. It has been observed
that the record of cases in which Special Leave
Petitions are to be filed, are not being sent in
time to the D. A. Legal Cell, New Delhi by the
Departments concerned and generally the record
is received by the said office after the expiry
of limitation period with the result that for
filing Special Leave Petition in the Supreme
Court, an application for condonation of delay
has to be filed. The Supreme Court of India has
taken serious note of this lapse and some time
does not condone the delay.
2. The Home Department is
especially requested that they should not send
affidavit on Cyclostyle papers as photo copy
prints of these affidavits are always subject to
objection by the Supreme Court of India. This is
the main and genuine difficulty which the Legal
Cell is facing.
3. While sending the
record of the case to the Legal Cell, the
Administrative Departments should also send the
comments/brief history of the cases.
4. In service matters, tax
matters and other important cases in which
Special Leave Petition are to be filed, the
Administrative Departments are requested to
send their Senior Officers well conversant with
the facts of such cases and discuss with the D.
A. Legal Cell/Advocate concerned. Clerks/Asstt.
who are not conversant with the facts of such
cases need not be sent to Delhi un-necessary.
5. The above instructions
may kindly be brought to the notice of all
concerned for strict compliance in future.
Yours faithfully
Sd/-
(A. L. VAIDYA)
LR-cum- Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
No. LLR-E(9)3/86
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
To
1. The District Attorney-cum-Public
Prosecutors,
Shimla/Mandi/Nahan/Una/Kangra at Dharamshala/
Hamirpur/ Chamba.
2. Assistant District Attorney-cum-Public
Prosecutors,
Solan/Bilaspur/ Kullu.
3. The Assistant Public Prosecutors,
Lahaul & Spiti at Kullu/Kinnaur at Peo.
Dated Shimla-2, the
27th June, 1992
Subject.—Representation in State Government cases before the Hon’ble District
Consumer Redressal Forum.
MEMO :
Instances have come to the
notice of the undersigned that the
representation in State Government cases is not
being made by the District Attorney and Deputy
District Attorney properly before the District
Consumer Redressal forum, and sometime they are
seeking the consent of this Department as to
whether State Government Departments are to be
represented in the cases before the said Forum
or not.
2. As you know that State
Government interests can be adversely affected
as a result of non-appearance on its behalf
before the District Consumer Redressal Forum,
you are, therefore, advised that in future State
Government cases should invariably be
conducted/defended properly without waiting for
any instructions as such from this department.
In case you are already engaged in Court cases
or you are not able to appear before the said
Forum due to certain reasons then you must
specially give in writing to the department
concerned as to why you can not conduct/defend
the case before the said Forum so that
arrangement of a private lawyer could be made by
the department concerned with prior permission
of this department.
These instructions should be
adhered to strictly.
Please acknowledge the receipt.
Yours
faithfully,
Sd/-
(A. L. VAIDYA)
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
la0 ,y0 ,y0 vkj0 fyV-
¼6½ 4@92
fgekpy izns'k ljdkj
fof/k foHkkx
izs"kd %
fof/k ijke'kZnkrk ,oa lfpo
¼fof/k½]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
izsf"kr %
1- leLr iz'kklfud lfpo]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
2- leLr foHkkxk/;{k] fgekpy
izns'k A
3- leLr mik;qDr] fgekpy izns'k A
fnukad f'keyk&2] 15 vDrwcj] 1992
fo"k;-&&loksZPp U;k;ky; esa eqdíeksa dh iSjoh
djus ckjsA
egksn;]
mijksDr fo"k; ij eq>s ;g dgus dk
funs'k gqvk gS fd fdlh Hkh ekeys esa mPpre
u;k;ky; esa vihy djus ls iwoZ iz'kklfud foHkkx
dks fof/k foHkkx dh jk; ysuh gksxh fd D;k ,sls
ekeyksa esa vihy djuk ljdkj ds fgr esa gksxk
vkSj tc dHkh Hkh ,slk ekeyk bl foHkkx ls mBkuk
gks rks mudks ;g Hkh lqfuf'pr djuk gksxk fd
U;k;ky; dk fu.kZ; fdl lhek rd ljdkjh
vuqns'kksa@uhfr dh vosgyuk djrk gSA
ljdkj ds /;ku esas vk;k gS fd mPpre
U;k;ky; ls lEcfU/kr ekeyksa esa iz'kklfud foHkkx
ekuuh; eq[; eU=h egksn; ds vuqeksnu ds fcuk gh
vihysa nk;j djrs gsSa] tks fd mfpr ugha gS
D;ksafd mPpre U;k;ky; esa iSjoh djus esa ljdkj
ij dkQh vkfFkZd cks> iM+rk gS vkSj ;g Hkh ik;k
x;k gS fd mPpre U;k;ky; esa tufgr dk ekeyk u
gksus ij Hkh iSjoh djuh iM+ jgh gSA
vr% lHkh ls vuqjks/k gsS fd mPpre
U;k;ky; esa vihy nk;j djus ls iwoZ ekuuh; eq[;
eU=h egksn; dk vuqeksnu ekuuh; izHkkjh eU=h th
ds ek/;e ls izkIr djuk gksxkA ,slk u gksus dh
fLFkfr esa mPpre U;k;ky; ds vf/koDrk dh Qhl ds
fcy dh vnk;xh bl foHkkx }kjk ugha dh tk,xhA
Hkonh;]
gLrk{kfjr@&
mi fof/k ijke'khZ ,oa izk:idkj]
fgekpy izns'k
ljdkjA
la0 ,y0 ,y0 vkj0 bZ0
¼9½3@88
fgekpy izns'k ljdkj
fof/k foHkkx
izs"kd %
fof/k ijke'kZnkrk ,oa
lfpo
¼fof/k½]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
izsf"kr %
1- leLr iz'kklfud lfpo]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
2- leLr foHkkxk/;{k] fgekpy izns'kA
fnukad f'keyk&2] 14
fnlEcj] 1992
fo"k;-&&mPpre U;k;ky; esa VSDl o lfoZl lEcU/kh
ekeykssa dh iSjohs ckjsA
egksn;]
eq>s mijksDr fo"k; ij ;g dgus dk
funs'k gqvk gS fd dj rFkk lfoZl lEcU/kh ekeys
( Tax & Service Matters)
esa mPpre U;k;ky; ds U;k;k/kh'k vDlj ekeys dh
vafre lquokbZ ds le; vkifRr;ka (Queries)
mBkrs gSa ftlds QyLo:Ik lEcfU/kr vf/koDrk dks
lEc) ufLr;ksa@nLrkostksa dh vuqifLFkfr esa
vkifRr;ksa dk mRrj nsus esa dfVukbZ is'k vkrh
gSA
2- vr% jkT; ljdkj tufgr esa
fu.kZ; fy;k gS fd lEcfU/kr iz'kklfud
lfpo@foHkkxk/;{k
Hkfo"; esa dj rFkk lfoZl lEcU/kh ekeyksa esa
mPpre U;k;ky; esa vafre lquokbZ (Final
arguments)
ds le; fdlh vf/kdkjh dks lEc}
ufLr;ksa@nLrkostksa ds lkFk vf/koDrk ds lkFk
mifLFkr jgus ds vkns'k tkjh djsa rkfd vf/koDrk
dks mRrj nsrs le; fdlh Hkh dfVukbZ dk lkeuk u
djuk iMs+A
3- d`Ik;k ikorh HkstssaA
Hkonh;]
gLrk{kfjr@&
mi lfpo
¼fof/k½]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
la0 ,y0 ,y0 vkj0 bZ0
¼9½5@90
fgekpy izns'k ljdkj
fof/k foHkkx
izs"kd %
fof/k ijke'kZnkrk ,oa lfpo
¼fof/k½]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
izsf"kr %
1- leLr iz'kklfud lfpo]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
2- leLr foHkkxk/;{k] fgekpy
izns'k A
fnukad f'keyk&2] 18&3&1993
fo"k;-&&mPpre U;k;ky; esa vf/koDrk fu;qDr djus
ckjsA
egksn;]
bl foHkkx ds uksfVl esa vk;k gS fd
mPpre U;k;ky; esa jkT; ljdkj dh vksj ls iSjoh
djokus gsrq fu;qDr fd, x, mPpdksfV ds
vf/koDrkvksa dh Qhl bR;kfn ij Hkkjh [kpkZ gks
jgk gSA jkT; ljdkj ds foRrh; ladV dks e/;utj
j[krs gq, vkidks lq>ko fn;k tkrk gS fd Hkfo";
esa mPpre U;k;ky; esa dsoy fo'ks"k ekeyksa esa
gh mPpre U;k;ky; ds vf/koDrk ekuuh; lykgdkj
¼ds0½]
fgekpy izns'k@foRr foHkkx dh iwoZ lgefr ls gh
iSjoh djokus gsrq fu;qDr fd;k djsaA jkT; ljdkj
ds fgekpy izns'k mPp u;k;ky; Lrj ds ekeys
egkf/koDrk] fgekpy izns'k o muds lgk;dksa }kjk
gh fuiVk, tkus pkfg, o tgka rd mPpre U;k;ky;
esa fgekpy izns'k ljdkj ls lEcfU/kr ekeyksa dk
lEcU/k gS] ;s ekeys ,MoksdsV&vkWu&fjdkMZ o ofj"B
vf/koDrk]
tks fd fgekpy izns'k ljdkj }kjk mPpre U;k;ky;
esa jkT; ljdkj ds ekeys fuiVkus gsrq fu;qDr fd,
x, gSa]
ds ek/;e ls gh fuiVk, tkus pkfg,A
Hkonh;]
gLrk{kfjr@&
¼,0
,y0 oS|k½
fof/k ijke'kZnkrk ,oa lfpo
¼fof/k½]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
la0 ,y0 ,y0 vkj0 bZ0 (9)-3/88-Hkkx&I
fgekpy izns'k ljdkj
fof/k foHkkx
izs"kd %
fof/k ijke'khZ ,oa lfpo
¼fof/k½]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
izsf"kr%
1- leLr iz'kklfud lfpo]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
2- leLr foHkkxk/;{k]
fgekpy izns'k A
fnukad f'keyk&171 002] 9 twu] 1993
fo"k;-&&mPpre U;k;ky; esa jkT; ljdkj ls lEcfU/kr
ekeyksa dh Bhd <ax ls iSjoh djus ckjsA
egksn;]
bl foHkkx ds uksfVl esa yk;k x;k gS
fd mPpre U;k;ky; esa jkT; ljdkj ls lEcfU/kr
ekeykss dh iSjoh Bhd <aax ls ugh gks jgh gS]
D;ksafd vfUre lquokbZ ds le; lEcfU/kr foHkkxksa
ds izfrfuf/k ekeyksas ls lEcfU/kr
nLrkostksa@ufLr;ksa ds lkFk U;k;ky; esa mifLFkr
ugha gksrs gSa A QyLo:Ik mPpre U;k;ky; esa
vf/kdrj ekeys jkT; ljdkj ds fo:) fu.khZr gksrs
gSa pawfd lEcfU/kr vf/koDrk dks lEc) ufLr;ksa@
nLrkostksa ds fcuk mRrj nsus esa dfBukbZ is'k
vkrh gS A
2- vr% jkT; ljdkj us tufgr esa
fu.kZ; fy;k gS fd lEcfU/kr iz'kklfud
lfpo@foHkkxk/;{k Hkfo"; esa jkT; ljdkj ls
vius foHkkxksa ls lEcfU/kr ekeyksa dh mPpre
U;k;ky; esa vfUre lquokbZ ds le; fdlh vf/kdkjh
dks lEc) ufLr;ksa@ nLrkostksa lfgr vf/koDrk ds
lkFk mifLFkr jgus ds vkns'k tkjh djsa rkfd
vf/koDrk dks mRRkj nsrs le; fdlh dfBukbZ dk
lkeuk u djuk iMs+ rFkk U;k;ky;ksa }kjk ikfjr
vkn'kksa dh izfr vf/koDrk ds ek/;e ls vkxkeh
dkjZokbZ gsrq izkIr djsa A
3- d`Ik;k ikorh Hkstsa A
Hkonh;]
gLrk{kfjr@
mi lfpo
¼fof/k½]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
la0 ,y0 ,y0 vkj0 bZ0 (9)-5/90
fgekpy izns'k ljdkj
fof/k foHkkx
izs"kd %
eq[; lfpo]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
izsf"kr %
1- leLr iz'kklfud lfpo]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
2- leLr foHkkxk/;{k]
fgekpy izns'kA
fnukaaaaad f'keyk&171 002] 5 vxLr] 1993
fo"k;-&&jkT; ljdkj ls lEcfU/kr fofHkUu U;k;ky;
ekeyksa essa vf/koDrk fu;qDr djus ckjsA
egksn;]
jkT; ljdkj ds uksfVl esa vk;k gS fd
fofHkUu U;k;ky;ksa esa jkT; ljdkj dh vksj ls
iSsjoh djus gsrq vf/koDrkvksa dks NksM+dj
¼fofHkUu
iz'kklfud foHkkxksa ds Lrj ij Qhl bR;kfn dh
VeZt ,.M dUMh'kUt½
(Terms and conditions)
r; fd, fcuk o l{ke vf/kdkjh o foHkkx dh iwoZ
lgefr fy, fcuk gh fu;qDr fd;k tkrk gSAmDr rF;ksa
dks e/;utj j[krs gq, vkidks lq>ko fn;k tkrk gS
fd Hkfo"; esa jkT; ljdkj ls lEcfU/kr fofHkUu
ekeyksa dh iSjoh djus gsrq vf/koDrk fu;qDr djus
dh ;fn vko';drk gks rks dfFkr vf/koDrk ls vius
Lrj ij loZizFke Qhl bR;kfn dh VeZt ,.M dUMh'kUkt
r; djus ds Ik'pkr~ l{ke vf/kdkjh dh Lohd`fr ysdj
rnksijkUr fof/k foHkkx dh lgefr yh tk,A
Hkonh;]
gLrk{kfjr@
mi lfpo
¼fof/k½]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
Court Cases
No. LLR-E(6)16/86-II
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to
the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
To
1. All the Administrative
Secretaries
to the Government of Himachal Pradesh,
Shimla-2.
2. All the Heads of
Departments,
Himachal Pradesh, Shimla.
3. All the Deputy
Commissioners,
in Himachal Pradesh.
Dated Shimla-2, the 7th October,
1993
Subject.—Non-filing
of replies to the Writ Petitions within the time
granted by the Court.
Sir,
I am directed to say that the
Advocate General, Himachal Pradesh has brought
to the notice of the Government that the replies
to the Writ Petitions are not being filled by
the departments concerned within the time
granted by the Court. For the non-filing of
reply, Hon’ble High Court has decided some
cases ex-parte. This not only result in
embarrassment to the Government but public
interest too suffers. I am directed to request
you to ensure that the reply to the Writ
Petitions is filed invariably within the period
granted by the Court so that the interest of the
Government does not suffer. Any lapse in this
regard will be viewed seriously.
2. The above instructions
may please be adhered strictly to avoid any
complication at later state.
The receipt of this
communication may be acknowledged.
Yours
faithfully,
Sd/-
Deputy Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
No. LLR-E(9)1 /88-II
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
LR-cum-Secretary(Law)to
the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
To
The Advocate General,
State of Himachal Pradesh,
Shimla-171001.
Dated Shimla-2, the 13th October,
1993
Subject.—Litigation
of Supreme Court.
Sir,
I am directed to say that the
Government of Himachal Pradesh has withdrawn the
instructions issued vide this department
letter No. LLR-E(9)1/88-Vol.II, dated the 16th
February, 1993. The Supreme Court litigation,
henceforth, shall be dealt with in accordance
with the Rules in the Law Department. The cases
to the senior and other Advocates on the panel
for the Supreme Court shall be assigned by the
Law Department.
2. No Advocate outside the
panel shall be appointed for any case by any
department of the Government. Any important
case, which required the appointment of a
counsel, outside the panel, for a particular
case shall be appointed by the Law Department
after taking the approval of His Excellency the
Governor.
3. The cases of routine
nature, which have not been assigned by the Law
Department to a particular Advocate, shall be
assigned by the Resident Commissioner, New
Delhi, under intimation to the Law Department.
Yours
faithfully,
Sd/-
Deputy Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
No. LLR-E(9)3/88
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
The Chief Secretary,
to the
Government of
Himachal Pradesh.
To
1. All the
Administrative Secretaries to the
Government of Himachal
Pradesh (by name).
2. All the Managing Directors
of all the
State
Corporations/Boards.
Dated Shimla-2, the 3rd November,
1993
Subject.—Litigation
of Departments/Boards/Corporations/ Autonomous
Bodies in Supreme Court of India.
Sir,
It has come to the notice of the
Government that some of the
Departments/Boards/Corporations/Autonomous
Bodies are not utilising the services of the
Advocates brought on panel by the State
Government for conduct/defence of cases in the
Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. It has also come
to the notice of the Government that the Senior
Advocate are being engaged by the
Boards/Corporations/ Autonomous Bodies for minor
matters and huge amounts are being expended on
this account .
2. It has been decided by
the State Government that invariably no Advocate
shall be appointed by any Department/Board/
Corporation & Autonomous Body outside the panel
of Advocates. However, any case involving grave
constitutional matter or issue of policy, which
requires engagement of top level Advocates of
Supreme Court outside the panel, the same shall
be appointed through the Law Department after
Chief Secretary’s clearance and approval. In
emergent cases, telephonic/Telex approval may be
taken from Secretary (Law) and the file put up
to Chief Secretary for ex-post-facto
approval.
3. The above instructions
shall be adhered to strictly.
4. The receipt of the
letter may be acknowledged to the Secretary
(Law) by name.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(S. K. CHAUHAN)
Chief Secretary to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
la0 ,y0 ,y0 vkj0 bZ0
(9)-3/88
fgekpy izns'k ljdkj
fof/k foHkkx
izs"kd %
fof/k ijke'kZnkrk ,oa lfpo
¼fof/k½]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
izsf"kr%
leLr iz'kklfud lfpo@
foHkkxk/;{k] fgekpy izns'kA
fnukad f'keyk&2] 26 Qjojh] 1994
fo"k;-&&mPpre U;k;ky; esa jkT; ljdkj dh vksj ls
iSjohs djus gsrq iSuy vf/koDrk fu;qDr djus ckjsA
egksn;]
bl foHkkx ds /;ku esa vk;k gS fd
mPpre U;k;ky; esa dbZ foHkkx tks fd mPpre
U;k;ky; ds fofHkUu ekeyksa esa
oknh@izfroknh gksrs gsSa] mPpre
U;k;ky; esa jkT; ljdkj dh vksj ls fu;qDr iSuy
vf/koDrkvksa dh fof/k foHkkx dh lgefr ds fcuk gh
vius Lrj ij iSjoh djus gsrq fu;qDr dj ysrs gSsA
vr% vkils vuqjks/k gS fd vius foHkkx ls
lEcfU/kr izR;sd ekeys] ftlesa jkT; ljdkj
izfroknh gks] esa mPpre U;k;ky; ds iSuy
vf/koDrkvksa dks fof/k foHkkx dh lgefr ls gh
fu;qDr djsa o lh/ks vius Lrj ij mPpre U;k;ky; ls
lEcfU/kr ekeyksa dh iSjoh djus gsrq vf/koDrk
fu;qDr u djsaA
d`Ik;k ikorh HkstssaA
Hkonh;]
gLrk{kfjr@
¼ds0
lh0 lwn½]
fof/k ijke'kZnkrk ,oa lfpo
¼fof/k½]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
la0 ,y0 ,y0 vkj0 bZ0 (6)-15/86
fgekpy izns'k ljdkj
fof/k foHkkx
izs"kd %
lfpo
¼fof/k½]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
izsf"kr%
leLr ftyk U;k;oknh] fgekpy izns'kA
fnukad f'keyk&2] 03&06&1994
fo"k;-&&nwjlapkj foHkkx ds ekeyksa dh iSjohs
djus ds lUnHkZ esaA
Kkiu%
,slk ns[kus esa vk;k gS fd nwjlapkj
foHkkx ls lEcfU/kr ekeyksa esa nwjlapkj foHkkx
ds Lrj ij U;k;ky;ksa esa IkSjoh djokus gsrq
lh/ks gh ftyk U;k;okfn;ksa dks vkxzg djus ds
mijkUr iSjoh gsrq fu;qDr dj fy;k tkrk gS] tks fd
izfdz;k ds foijhr gSA vr% funsZ'k fn, tkrs gSa
fd ,sls ekeyksa esa tc rd bl foHkkx }kjk funsZ'k
tkjh ugha fd, tkrs rc rd nwjlapkj foHkkx dh vksj
ls lEcfU/kr U;k;ky;ksa esa iSjoh u djsa vU;Fkk
,sls ekeys] ftuesa bl foHkkx }kjk funsZ'k tkjh
ugha fd, gksaxs dksafly Qhl fu/kkZfjr ugha dh
tk,xhA
gLrk{kfjr@&
mi lfpo
¼fof/k½]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
No. LLR-E(9)5/90
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
LR-cum-Secretary (Law)
to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
To
1. All the Administrative
Secretaries/Add. Secretaries/Special
Secretaries/ Joint Secretaries/Deputy
Secretaries,/Under Secretaries, to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
2. All Heads of
Departments in Himachal Pradesh.
3. All the Divisional
Commissioners, Himachal Pradesh.
4. All the Deputy
Commissioners in Himachal Pradesh.
Dated
Shimla-2, the 31st January, 1995
Subject.—Contempt
Petition (Civil) No. 57/93—titled court on its
own motion Vs. Tilak Raj Mista &
another—Instructions thereon.
Sir,
I am directed to forward a copy
of judgment dated 16-11-1994 delivered by the
Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh in the
Case titled as court on its own motion Vs.
Tilak Raj Mishta & another and to say that the
Advocate General, Himachal Pradesh was
approached by the Administrative Department to
defend the case in the Hon’ble Himachal Pradesh
Administrative Tribunal/High Court of Himachal
Pradesh on behalf of the contemners. It has
now been decided that whenever any contempt
proceedings are filed against any
officer/official while discharging his official
duties, the Advocate General will not defend the
officer/official concerned and the said
officer/official shall have to engage his own
advocate after obtaining the sanction of the
Government for defence at public expenses. The
Government while according such sanction has to
examine whether the act of the officer/official
was committed in good faith and in exercise of
his official duty. The Government will reimburse
the fee to the officer/official concerned after
conclusion of the case in accordance with the
instructions issued by this department letter
No. LLR-E(10)3/93, dated 28-7-1994.
Copy of judgement of Hon’ble High Court
of Himachal Pradesh, dated 16th
November, 1994 in the contempt Petition (C) No.
57 of 1993 titled as Court on its own motion
Versus
Tilak Raj Mistra and other.
bhawani
Singh,
J (ORAL).
C.M.P.(M) No. 181 of 1993,
Shri Hira Singh Thakur Vs. Shri
Bali Ram and others, was admitted on
14-5-1993—Accordingly, notices were issued for
the service of the respondents, namely Shri
Bali Ram, Shri Khushi Ram, Financial
Commissioner (Revenue and Appeals), to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla, and
Shri Roop Singh.
Process-servers, Smt.Ramdei
and Shri Pradeep Aggarwal, from the Court of
Senior Subordinate Judge, Shimla, were entrusted
the notices for service on respondents Nos. 3
and 4. Process-server Sh. Pradeep Aggarwal
reported that respondent No. 2 (Shri Roop Singh)
did not accept the notice and asked him to go
back to the place from where he had come. The
report of the Process Server does not state any
kind of intemperate remarks uttered by this
repentant against this court. In any case, Shri
G.C. Gupta learned counsel appearing for him
submits that this respondent is genuinely
represent of the development and seeks mercy for
his client. He has also tendered unconditional
apology with an undertaking to be careful in
future.
Refusal to accept the process
of the court causes obstruction in the discharge
of judicial functions and amounts to contempt.
No one can forward to witness the refusal by
this respondent with the result that no witness
has signed this report. However, looking to the
unconditional apology tendered by this
respondent, no punishment is awarded and notice
issued to him is discharged.
So far as respondent No. 1
Shri Tilak Raj Mista is concerned, process was
to be served by Process Server Smt. Ram Dei. In
her report she has stated that she went to
the Secretariat for serving the process on
this respondent at about 1 P.M. There, she found
Shri Tilak Raj Mista, Private Secretary to
Financial Commissioner (Revenue and Appeals),
Government of Himachal Pradesh and she showed
him the notice, Shri Tilak Raj Mista took the
notice and the copy of petition. Thereafter,
when she asked him to write that notice was
received with copy, he stated that it was not
his duty to do so. He also stated that in future
summons be not brought to him. He also said that
“what will your High Court do”.
When this matter came to the
notice of this Court on 22-7-1993, show cause
notices were issued to the contemnors. They were
asked to file their replies on affidavits with
supporting documents, if any, and state as to
why they be not held guilty of contempt of court
and punished accordingly.
Reply of respondent Shri Tilak
Raj Mista has been examined. He has made crude
and curious attempt to answer to allegation
against him. It is absolutely clear from his
reply that he is trying to make a false defence
against the complaint of the Process Server. As
a matter of fact, his reply clearly demonstrates
that the incident had taken place and he had
shown total disrespect not only to the process
of the this Court but also to the lady Process
Server who was assigned the work to serve the
process on this respondent. Holding a
responsible post with the Highest Revenue
Officer of the State, his action is highly
deplorable and condemnable. There is no reason
why the version of lady Process Server be
disbelieved. Accordingly, respondent Tilak Raj
Mista is held guilty of committing the contempt
of this court. Apology tendered by him is not
genuine and it is rejected.
Now, the question arises, what
punishment should be awarded to him. The
contempt is of serious nature. It calls for
exemplary punishment. Therefore, respondent
Tilak Raj Mista is sentenced to undergo simple
imprisonment for four months and to pay a fine
of Rs. 2000/-. Failing to deposit the fine, he
will suffer further simple imprisonment for one
month.
Before parting with the case,
I would like to deal with another serious aspect
of the case. This contemner Shri Tilak Raj Mista
is being represented by the learned Advocate
General . The learned Advocate General has
appeared personally in this case. He points out
that the difficulty has arisen on account of the
Govt. order No. Contempt Pet.(C) No.57 of 1993,
directing him to appear in this case. I would
have proceeded to make serious remarks against
the State Government’s attempt helping those who
have committed the contempt of the court and
directing the office of the Advocate General to
appear for them and defend them. Since the
learned Advocate General has restrained me to do
so, I leave the matter at that to be attested
to in any other case if the present situation
continues.
A copy of this order be
supplied to the learned Advocate General free
of cost.
Sd/-
(BHAWANI
SINGH)
16th Nov., 1994.
_________
K. C. SOOD
Government of Himachal Pradesh
LR-cum-Secretary (Law)
DO. No. LLR-E(9)3/86
Dated Shimla 30th March, 1995.
Subject.—Litigation
of Supreme Court—Engagement of counsel.
My dear
Kindly refer to this
Department letter No. LLR-(E) 24/88 dated 1st
October, 1999 addressed to the Advocate General,
H. P. and copy endorsed to all the
Administrative Secretaries amongst other
regarding entrustment of cases to the Advocate
in the Supreme Court cases.
Instances have come to the
notice of the State Government that most of the
Departments are engaging Advocates for
conducting criminal/civil cases in the Hon’ble
Supreme Court of India at their own level
without obtaining the prior permission from the
Law Department, which is against the above
instructions issued by the Government. It has
again now been decided that no department
shall henceforth entrust the case at its own
level to the Advocate without prior permission
of the Law Department. The violation of these
instructions will be viewed seriously and the
payment of fee will not be made by this
Department in such cases.
I shall be grateful if these
instructions are brought to the notice of all
concerned working under your control for strict
compliance.
With regards.
Yours sincerely,
Sd/-
(K. C.
SOOD)
All the Administrative
Secretaries
to the Government of Himachal
Pradesh.
________
No. LLR-E(9)3/86-II
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
To
1. All the District
Attorney, Himachal Pradesh.
2. All the Deputy
District Attorney, Himachal Pradesh.
3. All the Assistant
District Attorney, Himachal Pradesh.
Dated Shimla-2, the 25th May, 1995
Subject.—Land
reference cases—instruction thereof.
MEMORANDUM:
Instances have come to the
notice of LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh that the
certified copies of the judgement/order are not
supplied to the department concerned
immediately. As the result of this in certain
cases the period of limitation expired and the
judgement/order of the Court become final, which
directly put the State Government in an awkward
position and sometimes resulted in heavy
financial loss. It has now been decided that the
Incharge of the case shall apply for the copy of
the judgement/order on the same day on which the
judgment/order is delivered/made by the Court
and as and when the copy of the judgement/order
is supplied by the copying agency, the same must
be sent to the concerned department for
appropriate action at once.
2. The above instruction
should be adhered to strictly failing which it
will be viewed seriously and the defaulter will
be processed departmentally
Please acknowledge the receipt.
Sd/-
Joint
Secretary (Law) to the
Government of
Himachal Pradesh.
__________
Immediate.
No. LLR-B(14)23/92-III
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From:
LR-cum-Secretary
(Law) to the
Government of
Himachal Pradesh.
To
1.
All the Administrative Secretaries to
the
Government of
Himachal Pradesh.
2.
All Heads of Departments in Himachal
Pradesh.
Dated Shimla-2, the 17th
November, 1995
Subject.—Appointment
of Advocates for the conduct/defence of State
litigation in the Supreme Court—instructions
thereof.
Sir,
Instances have come to the
notice of the undersigned that the lawyers so
engaged for the conduct/defence of the case in
the Supreme Court by the Law Department are
changed by the representative of the
Administrative Department concerned without the
prior approval of the; Law Department, which is
against the instructions issued by this
Department from time to time.
2. While referring the
matter for the engagement of a Counsel in a
particular case, keeping in view of the
importance, should specifically indicate whether
the lawyer is required to be engaged out of the
panel of the lawyers so maintained in the Law
Department and if the Administrative Department
intend to engage a particular lawyer in a
particular case then it should specifically
state the name of that advocate indicating the
interest involved of the State Government in
that case so that necessary approval are taken
well in time. If the representative of any
Administrative Department engages any lawyer
without the approval of the Law Department, the
Officer who engaged such lawyer, will be
personally responsible and the Law Department
will not make the payment of fees to such
lawyer.
3. The above instructions
may be brought to the notice of all concerned
for strict compliance.
Yours
faithfully,
Sd/-
(K. C. SOOD)
Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal
Pradesh.
___________
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
Dated: Shimla-2, the December, 1995
NOTIFICATION
No. LLR-B(14)-23/92-II.—The
Government of Himachal Pradesh is pleased to
amend the provisions of para 25.1 and 25.2(1) of
the Punjab Law Department Mannual as applicable
to the State of Himachal Pradesh as under :—
The ordinary scale of fee
for Law Officers:
25.1
The ordinary fee payable to the Law Officers for
cases conducted by them throughout pertaining to
suits for recovery of property, breach of
contract of damages, will be calculated as
follows:—
(a) If the amount or
value of property, debt or damages shall not
exceed Rs. 25,000/- at 10 percent.
(b) If the amount or
value shall exceed Rs. 25,000/- and not
exceed Rs. 50,000/- on Rs. 25,000/- at 10
percent and on the remainder at 8 percent.
(c) If the amount or
value shall exceed Rs. 50,000/- and not exceed
Rs. One lakh, on Rs. 50,000/- as above and on
the remainder at four percent.
(d) If the amount or
value shall exceed Rs.1,00,000/- and not
exceed Rs. 5,00,000/- on Rs. 1,00,000/- as
above and on the remainder at 2 percent.
(e) If the amount or value
shall exceed Rs. 5,00,000/- on Rs. 5,00,000/- as
above and on the remainder at one percent.
25.2 (1)
The fee calculated according to the table above
shall be subject to a maximum limit or
Rs.10,000/- for any one case, provided that in
any case of great importance making an unusual
demand on the time and energy of the Law Officer
as it considers a suitable remuneration may be
granted, not exceeding the fixed percentage rate
upto maximum of Rs. 20,000/-
By order,
(K. C. SOOD)
Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal
Pradesh.
Endst. No. LLR-B(14)-23/92-II dated:
Shimla 1995.
Copy forwarded to :—
1.
The Director of Prosecution, H.P. Craig
Garden, Shimla-2.
2.
All District Attorneys in Himachal
Pradesh.
3.
The Controller, Printing and Stationery
Department, Ghora Chowki, Shimla-5 for
publication in the Himachal Pradesh Rajpatra.
Sd/-
Joint Secretary (Law)
to the
Government of Himachal
Pradesh.
__________
No. LLR-E(9)5/90
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
LR-cum-Secretary (Law)
to the
Government of Himachal
Pradesh.
To
1. All the Administrative
Secretaries to the
Government of H.P.
2. All the Heads of
Departments in Himachal Pradesh.
3. All the Divisional
Commissioners in Himachal Pradesh.
4. All the Deputy
Commissioners in Himachal Pradesh.
Dated: Shimla-2, 9th July, 1996
Subject.—Regarding
defence of Contempt Petitions—instructions
thereon.
Sir,
I am directed to say that a
meeting was held under the Chairmanship of the
Chief Secretary on 18-5-1996 in connection with
Contempt Cases pending in various Courts
against the officer(s) of the Government. The
matter was discussed in all its ramifications
and Advocate General agreed that in all cases
where show cause notice/Contempt Petition is
issued to an officer in that case Advocate
General shall defend the officer, however, in
cases where contempt proceedings are initiated,
the concerned officer shall be defended by a
Counsel/Advocate engaged by him as per present
practice.
2. The above instructions
may please be brought to the notice of all
concerned.
3. The above instructions
supersede the earlier instructions to the
extent.
4. Please acknowledge its
receipt.
Yours
faithfully,
Sd/-
Joint Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
_________
PERSONAL ATTENTION
No. LLR-E(9)5/90
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
To
1. All the Administrative
Secretaries to the Government of Himachal
Pradesh.
2. All the Heads of
Departments in Himachal Pradesh.
3. All the Divisional
Commissioners in Himachal Pradesh.
4. All the Deputy
Commissioners in Himachal Pradesh.
Dated:
Shimla-2, the 13th August, 1996
Subject.—Regarding
defence of Contempt Petitions—instructions
thereon.
Sir,
I am directed to invite your
attention to this department letter of even
number dated 9-7-96 on the subject cited above
and to clarify that Law Officers cannot appear
in contempt proceedings against the officers who
are proceeded against by name due to some legal
implications. It is further made clear that in
show cause notice/contempt petitions the
Advocate General/Law Officer of the State will
appear on behalf of the officer who is being
proceeded against in contempt proceedings in
official designation.
2. This may please be
brought to notice of all concerned.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Joint
Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
__________
la0 ,y0 ,y0 vkj0 bZ0
(9)-1/88-I
fgekpy izns'k ljdkj
fof/k foHkkx
izs"kd %
fof/k ijke'kZnkrk ,oa lfpo
¼fof/k½]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
izsf"kr%
1- leLr iz'kklfud
lfpo@la;qDr
lfpo@mi
lfpo@ voj lfpo] fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
2- leLr foHkkxk/;{k] fgekpy
izns'kA
3- leLr mik;qDr] fgekpy izns'kA
fnukad f'keyk&2] 5 twu] 1997
fo"k;-&&mPpre
U;k;ky; esa flfoy vihy nk;j djus ckjsA
egksn;]
bl foHkkx ds uksfVl esa vk;k gS fd
dqN foHkkxksa }kjk mPpre U;k;ky; esa flfoy
ekeyksa esa vihy nk;j djus ckjs ftyk U;k;oknh]
ubZ fnYyh ls lh/ks vkxzg fd;k tkrk gS fd mPpre
U;k;ky; esa ,MoksdsV&vkWu&fjdkMZ ds ek/;e ls
rqjUr vihy nk;j dh tk, tks fd mfpr Ik)fr ugha
gSA ,sls ekeys ftueas jkT; ljdkj us mPpre
U;k;ky; esa vihy esa tkuk gksrk gS ds ckjs mfpr
ek/;e ls loZizFke fof/k foHkkx
¼fyfVxs'ku
d{k½
fgekpy izns'k lfpoky; f'keyk&2 ls fd ekeyk vihy
ds fy, fQV gS vFkok ugha ds ckjs vuqeksnu izkIr
djuk vfuok;Z gSA ;fn ekeyk vihy nk;j djus gsrq
fQV (Fit)
gS rks iz'kklfud foHkkx vius Lrj ij vius foHkkx
ls lEcfU/kr eU=h egksn; dk vuqeksnu izkIr djus
ds mijkUr fof/k foHkkx ls vf/koDrk fu;qDr djokus
ckjs izLrko Hkstrs gSsaa rnksijkUr fof/k foHkkx
ftyk U;k;oknh ubZ fnYyh dks vihy nk;j djus
gsrq@vf/koDrk fu;qDr djus gsrq funsZ'k
tkjh djrk gS ftldh izfr iz'kklfud foHkkx dks Hkh
vkxkeh vko';d dkjZokbZ gsrq i`"Bkafdr dh tkrh
gSA
2- vr% vkils vkxzg gS fd Hkfo";
esa ;fn fdlh Hkh flfoy ekeys esa mPpre U;k;ky;
esa vihy nk;j djuh gks rks fyfVxs'ku foHkkx rFkk
izHkkjh eU=h dk vuqeksnu mfpr ek/;e ls izkIr
djus ds mijkUr vihy nk;j djus gsrq ekeyk bl
foHkkx ls mBk,a o lh/ks ftyk U;k;oknh] ubZ fnYyh
ls vius Lrj ij vihy nk;j djus ckjs vkxzg u djsaA
d`Ik;k /;ku jgs fd bl lUnHkZ esa ;fn dksbZ Hkh
foyEc gksxk rks mlds fy, foHkkx Lo;a gh mRrjnk;h
gksxkA d`Ik;k bu funsZ'kksa dks vius v/khuLFk
foHkkxksa ds uksfVl esa Hkh yk,Aa
3- d`Ik;k mDr vkns'kksa dh
dM+kbZ ls vuqikyuk lqfuf'pr djsaA
Hkonh;]
gLrk{kfjr@&
¼lqjsUnz flag Bkdqj½
lfpo
¼fof/k½]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
Immediate
PERSONAL ATTENTION
No. LLR-E(9)5/90
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
To
1. All the Administrative
Secretaries to the Government of Himachal
Pradesh.
2. All the Heads of
Departments in Himachal Pradesh.
3. All the Divisional
Commissioners in Himachal Pradesh.
4. All the Deputy
Commissioners in Himachal Pradesh.
Dated: Shimla-2, 30th September,
1997
Subject.—Regarding
defence of Contempt Petitions—instructions
thereon.
Sir,
I have been directed to say
that instances have come to the notice of
Government that various departments of the
Pradesh do not take prior permission relating to
the Defence of Contempt Petition in the court(s)
resultantly refer the cases to this Department
for obtaining “ex-post-facto” sanction, which is
against the prescribed/approved policy of
Government. In order to avoid this practice, the
Government has decided that in future no
“ex-post-facto” sanction will be accorded in any
shape. Henceforth prior permission of the Law
Department shall be necessary.
2. These instructions be
adhered to strictly and brought to the notice of
your subordinate offices.
3. Please acknowledge the
receipt.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(SURINDER SINGH THAKUR)
LR-cum-Secretary (Law)
to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
__________
Immediate
PERSONAL ATTENTION
No. LLR-E(9)5/90.
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
LR-cum-Secretary
(Law) to the
Government
of Himachal Pradesh.
To
1. All the Administrative
Secretaries to the Government of
Himachal Pradesh.
2. All the Heads of
Departments in Himachal Pradesh.
3. All the Divisional
Commissioners in Himachal Pradesh.
4. All the Deputy
Commissioners in Himachal Pradesh.
Dated:
Shimla-2, the 4th October, 1997
Subject.—Regarding
defence of Contempt Petitions—instructions
thereof.
Sir,
In continuation to this
department letter of even number, dated
30-9-1997 on the subject cited above, I am to
state if any case pertaining to “ex-post-facto”
sanction is still lying pending in your
department then the same be submitted to this
department for appropriate sanction by 30th
October, 1997 positively, otherwise it would be
presumed that no such case is lying pending in
any department and henceforth no “ex-post-facto”
sanction shall be accorded by this department
at any cost, as already mentioned in this
department letter referred to above.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(SURINDER SINGH THAKUR)
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
_________
No. LLR-E(12)3/93
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From:
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to
the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
To
1. All the Administrative
Secretaries/Additional Secretaries/ Special
Secretaries/ Joint Secretaries/Deputy
Secretaries/Under Secretaries to the to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-2.
2. All Heads of
Departments in Himachal Pradesh.
3. All the Divisional
Commissioners in Himachal Pradesh.
4. All the Deputy
Commissioners in Himachal Pradesh.
Dated: Shimla-2, the 29th October,
1997
Subject.—Regarding
assessment of fee in respect of private advocate
engaged for the self defence on public expenses
in favour of Officers/Officials—instructions
thereof.
Sir,
In continuation of this
department letter of even number, dated
28-7-1994 on the subject cited above, it has
been decided that the amount of Rs. 1,000/- ( as
journey & boarding charges in addition to the
fees as assessed in the aforesaid letter) will
be payable only to Shimla based lawyers who are
engaged for self defence at public expenses for
attending hearings outside Shimla and no
additional charges will be payable for hearing
at Shimla except the fee. It is also made clear
that the amount of Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees one
thousand) only will be as a lump sum payment for
the case irrespective of the number of hearings.
2. It is, therefore,
requested that the above information may please
be brought to the notice of all
Officers/Officials working under your control
for compliance.
Yours
faithfully,
Sd/-
(SURINDER SINGH THAKUR)
LR-cum-Secretary
(Law) to the
Government of
Himachal Pradesh.
No. LLR-E(9)5/90
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
To
1. All the Administrative
Secretaries/Additional Secretaries/ Special
Secretaries/Joint Secretaries/ Deputy
Secretaries/Under Secretaries to the Govt. of
H.P.
2. All the Heads of
Departments in Himachal Pradesh.
3. All the Divisional
Commissioners in H.P.
4. All the Deputy
Commissioners in Himachal Pradesh.
Dated: Shimla-2, the 2nd July, 1998
Subject.—Regarding
defence of Contempt Petitions—instructions
thereof.
Sir,
It has been decided by the
Government in view of the judgement dated
9-12-1997 delivered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
of India AIR(Feb. 1998) S.C. 685 in case titled
as Commissioner, Agra. & Ors. Vs. Rohtas
Singh & Ors. That the Advocate General, Himachal
Pradesh or any other Government Advocate is
authorised to defend the officer(s)/ official(s)
where contempt of court are issued either by
name or by designation while discharging the
official duties.
2. The above instructions
may please be brought to the notice of all
concerned.
3. The above instructions
supersede the earlier instructions to this
extent.
4. Please acknowledge its
receipt.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(SURINGER SINGH THAKUR)
LR-cum-Secretary
(Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
_________
No. LLR-E(9)5/90
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
LR-cum-Secretary(Law)to
the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
To
1. All the
Administrative
Secretaries/Additional
Secretaries/Special Secretaries/Joint
Secretaries/Deputy Secretaries/Under Secretaries
to the Govt. of H.P.,
Shimla-2.
2. All the Heads of
Departments in Himachal Pradesh.
3. All the Divisional
Commissioners in Himachal Pradesh.
4. All the Deputy
Commissioners in Himachal Pradesh.
Dated: Shimla-2, the 29th July,
1998
Subject.—Matters
concerning litigation in H.P.
Courts/Administrative Tribunal,
Instructions/Guidelines.
Sir,
I have been directed to say that
it is a matter of serious concern to the
Government that in large number of cases, filed
before the Courts/Tribunal, the concerned
departments have not cared to file the replies
to the Suits/applications for a pretty long
time. However, it is noticed that in some cases,
the delay in filing replies has gone inasmuch as
even, more than 10 years. The Tribunal in
particular is obviously concerned about this
laxity and lack of response on the part of the
Government. Further more, it has also been
observed that in some cases the Courts/Tribunal
have ordered the payment of costs to the
litigant(s).
2. Keeping in view these lapses,
the State Government have viewed this matter
with all seriousness and it has been decided
that the concerned departments shall ensure that
there should not be any delay in filing the
replies at all and the costs wherever ordered to
be paid in the Court/Tribunal in such cases, are
not to be paid by the Government or from the
Government funds, but shall be paid by the
individual, responsible for this delay and such
responsibility shall be immediately fixed by the
Secretary concerned.
3. These instructions be adhered
to strictly and be brought to the notice of all
subordinate offices/officers under your control.
4. Please acknowledge its receipt.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(SURINDER SINGH THAKUR)
LR-cum-Secretary
(Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh
__________
fgekpy izns'k ljdkj
fof/k foHkkx
vf/klwpuk
f'keyk&171 002] 11 twu] 1999
la[;k ,y0 ,y0 vkj0&bZ0¼9½&2@76-&&fgekpy
izns'k dh jkT;iky] bl foHkkx dh vf/klwpuk la[;k%
,y0,y0vkj0&107@420&54 rkjh[k 27&8&87 ds dzze esa
flfoy izfdz;k lafgrk ds vkns'k XXVII
ds
fu;e 1 vkSj 2 }kjk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,]
eq[; vj.;iky ou
¼ifj;kstuk½
fgekpy izns'k] funs'kd b.Mks teZu paxj
ifj;kstuk] funs'kd vkbZ0MCY;w0Mh0ih0]
¼fgYt½
d.Mh vkSj funs'kd] fgekpy izns'k jkT; Hkwfe
iz;ksx cksMZ dks] fgekpy izns'k jkT; dh vksj ls
dk;Z djus gsrq fgekpy izns'k jkT; ds }kjk ;k
fo:) fdlh Hkh okn esa okn Ik=ksa ;k fyf[kr
dFkuksa dks gLrk{kfjr vkSj lR;kfir djus vkSj
fdlh Hkh U;kf;d dk;Zokgh dh ckcr fgekpy izns'k
jkT; dh vksj ls dk;Z djus ds fy, Hkh izkf/kd`r
djrh gSaA
vkns'k
}kjk]
gLrk{kfjr@&
¼jkes'oj
'kekZ½
lfpo
¼fof/k½]
fgekpy izns'k ljdkjA
Ik`"Bkadu la0 ,y0,y0vkj0&bZ0¼9½&2@76
rkjh[k f'keyk&2]11 twu]1999-
Ikzfrfyfi lwpukFkZ ,oa vko';d dk;Zokgh gsrq
izsf"kr gS%&
1- leLr iz'kklfud
lfpo@fo'ks"k
lfpo@vfrfjDr
lfpo@la;qDr lfpo vkSj mi& lfpo fgekpy
izns'k ljdkj] f'keyk&2-
2- lfpo ou fgekpy izns'k ljdkj dks muds
Ik= la[;k ou&1¼ch½
1&1@92 fnukad 3&3&99 ds lUnHkZ esa
lwpukFkZA
3- fgekpy izns'k ds leLr foHkkxk/;{kA
4- jftLVªkj tujy] fgekpy izns'k mPp
U;k;ky; f'keyk&1
5- fgekpy izns'k ds leLr lekgrkZ
¼DySDVtZ½A
6- iz/kku eq[; vj.;iky] fgekpy izns'k]
f'keyk&1
7- eq[; vj.;iky ou
¼ifj;kstuk½
fgekpy izns'k] f'keykA
8- funs'kd vkbZ0MCY;w0Mh0ih0
¼fgYt½
d.Mh] lksyu]
fgekpy izns'kA
9- funs'kd] fgekpy izns'k Hkwfe iz;ksx
cksMZ]
[kyhuh] f'keyk&2
10- funs'kd] b.Mks teZu paxj
ifj;kstuk]ikyeiqj ftyk dkaxM+k] fgekpy izns'kA
11- fgekpy izns'k ds leLr ou vj.;ikyA
12- lgk;d fo/kk;h izk:idkj
¼fgUnh½
fgekpy izns'k lfpoky;] f'keyk&2-
13- fgekpy izns'k ds leLr ftyk ,oa l=
U;k;k/kh'k A
14- fgekpy izns'k ds leLr ftyk
U;k;oknh@mi&ftyk U;k;oknh rFkk lgk;d ftyk
U;k;oknhA
15- foRrk;qDr] fgekpy izns'k ds dksVZ DydZ]
fgekpy izns'k lfpoky;] f'keyk&2
16- fu;U=d] fgekpy izns'k eqnz.k ,oa ys[ku
foHkkx f'keyk dks jkti= esa izdk'ku gsrqA
gLrk@&
voj lfpo
fof/k
fgekpy izns'k
ljdkjA
&&&&&&&
Immediate
Court case.
No. LLR-E(9)1/88-III
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to
the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
To
1. All the Administrative
Secretaries to the Govt. of
H.P.
2. All the Heads of
Departments in Himachal Pradesh.
3. All the Deputy
Commissioners in Himachal Pradesh.
Dated:
Shimla-2, the 24th January, 2000
Subject.—Delay
in filing replies in various Original
Applications, pending in the H.P. Administrative
Tribunal.
Sir,
In continuation to this
Department letter of even number dated
30-11-1999, I am directed to say that it has
been brought to the notice of the Hon’ble Chief
Minister that the various H.P. Govt. Departments
are not filing replies in time and are also not
producing record in the cases pending before the
Hon’ble H.P. Administrative Tribunal. The
Hon’ble Chief Minister has viewed it very
seriously and has passed the following orders
for strict compliance in this behalf with
immediate effect:—
(i)
That the replies in the cases before the
H.P. Administrative Tribunal may be filed within
the stipulated period and the record so required
be produced as and when desired by the Hon’ble
Tribunal.
(ii)
That if the replies are not filed in time
or the record is not produced at the directions
of the Hon’ble Tribunal, departmental action
should be initiated against the concerned
Officer/Official and he/she shall personally be
liable for the negligence and the lapses in
his/her official duty and if any cost is imposed
by the Hon’ble Tribunal, the concerned
Officer/Official who has caused the delay in
filing the reply shall personally be liable to
pay the said cost from his/her own pocket.
2. You are, therefore,
requested to bring these instructions to the
notice of all Officers/Officials of your
Department and ensure strict implementation.
3. The receipt of this
communication may please be acknowledged.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(RAMESHWAR SHARMA)
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
—————
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT (LEGISLATION)
From :
The LR-cum-Secretary
(Law) to the
Government of Himachal
Pradesh.
To
All the District
Attorneys in H.P. (with ten spare copies).
Dated: Shimla-2, the 22nd July, 2000
Subject.—Courts
of H.P. by the District
Attorneys/ADAs—re-fixation of Counsel fee
thereof.
Sir,
I am directed to State that the matter
regarding enhancement of Counsel fee rates being
paid to the District Attorneys etc. in respect
of civil cases of other State Govts./U.Ts. being
defended by them in the Courts of this State was
under active consideration of the State Govt.
for some time past as the existing fee rates of
Rs.300/- for the entire case fixed long back had
become impracticable with the present times.
It has, therefore, now been
decided by the Govt. to revise the fee
payable to District
Attorneys/Dy.Distt.Attorneys/Assistant
Distt.Attorneys as follows:—
Courts.
Fee for conducting the entire case
|
1. Courts at Sub
Divisional level, such as the court of
Sr.Sub-Judge, Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Court of Assistant Commissioner, Ist
Grade, Sub-Divisional Collector,
Sub-Divisional Magistrate ,Tehsildar or
such equivalent courts. |
Rs. 50/- per case. |
|
2. Courts of District Judge, Session Judge,
Addl. Distt. Judge, Addl. Session Judge,
MACT, Distt. Collector, Divisional
Commissioner, Distt. Consumer Forum
established under the Consumer Protection
Act, 1986 and Labour and Industrial Tribunal
set up under the Industrial Disputes Act,
1947 or such equivalent courts. |
Rs.1250/- per case.
|
The 1/3 rd share of fee in
each case will be deposited by the concerned
District Attorneys etc. in the Govt. Treasuries as
State share as per provisions of the H.P.F.R.Vol.I
as per the practice already in vogue.
The fee bills may,
therefore, be sent to this Department for
verification accordingly by the concerned District
Attorneys.
The aforesaid orders of
enhancement of fee will take effect from the date of
issue of this communication.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(RAMESHWAR
SHARMA),
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to the
Government
of Himachal Pradesh.
No. LLR-B(14)-4/99
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT (LEGISLATION)
From :
The LR-cum-Secretary
(Law) to the
Government of Himachal
Pradesh.
To
All the Administrative
Secretaries to the
Government of Himachal
Pradesh,
Shimla-171002.
Dated: Shimla-2, the 31st August, 2000
Subject.—Submission
of cases to the Law Department—Instructions
regarding.
Sir/Madam,
I am to bring to your notice that
the Administrative Departments send various
proposals to this Department for examination/vetting
which are either incomplete or contain some lacunae
resulting in avoidable delay in their
clearance/vetting by the Law Department. In most of
the cases sent to Law Department, the A.D. do not
indicate clearly the point on which the
advice/opinion of the Law Department is required and
sometimes only vague information is available and
vital facts are not available on file which results
in avoidable delay in tendering the advice. All out
efforts are being made to finalise the cases in the
Opinion/Legislation/Litigation Wings of this
Department at the earliest possible but sometimes
because of the submission of incomplete
documents/information of the case, results in
avoidable delays.
2. The matter has, therefore,
been discussed in the monthly departmental meeting
to review/monitoring the efficiency in
administration and to improve the functioning of the
Law Department. In such a meeting held on the 24th
of August, 2000 it was decided that to tackle the
above situations effectively, the Law Department
(Opinion/Legislation/Litigation Wings) would not
return the cases received from the A.D. with
observations immediately but would request the
Branch Officer to depute some responsible officer
well conversant with the case personally same day or
the next day so that the position is discussed in
detail and the information /documents are
authoritatively obtained to form a candid opinion/
advice on the case expeditiously aiming at the
qualitative improvement in the functioning of the
Law Departments Wings as well as the mode of
submissions of the cases by the A.D. In the cases
where above remedy fails to achieve the desired
results, the concerned wing of the Law Department
would before returning such cases with the
observations to the A.D. apprise the Secretary (Law)
of the position who may also like to contact
telephonically the Secretary concerned of the A.D.
of the efforts made by this Department to secure the
relevant documents/information from the departmental
officers of the A.D., thereby obviating the
avoidable delay in the disposal of the case in this
Department.
3. I am, therefore, to request
you to please instruct all the Officers concerned
under your administrative control to follow the
above instructions while sending the proposals
concerning your department for examination/vetting
to this Department.
Kindly acknowledge receipt of this
communication.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(RAMESHWAR SHARMA)
LR-cum-Secretary
(Law) to the
Government of
Himachal Pradesh.
________
No. LLR-E(2)1/94-II.(Loose)
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
To
1. All the Administrative
Secretaries to the Govt. of
H.P.
2. All the Heads of
Departments in Himachal Pradesh.
3. Sh Rakesh Bharti,
Additional Advocate General, Tribunal Cell,
Shimla-2.
4. Sh. R.K Sharma, Additional
Advocate General, Tribunal Cell, Shimla-2.
5. The Director (Prosecution),
S.D.A. Complex, Kasumpti, Shimla
Dated: Shimla-2, the 1st February, 2001
Subject.—Expeditious
disposal of cases by Himachal Pradesh Administrative
Tribunal.
Sir/Madam,
In response to
the anxiety expressed by the Hon’ble Chief Minister
in his address to the Secretaries in the meeting
dated 30-12-2000, I have studied the problem in
great details and have also talked to most of the
Administrative Secretaries and concerned Additional
Advocate Generals. I have proposed a mechanism for
effective prosecution and disposal of Government
cases by Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal.
The proposed mechanism has been approved by the
worthy chief Secretary and the Hon’ble Chief
Minister. Therefore, I am directed to circulate the
following guidelines/instructions for implementation
and necessary action on the part of all the
concerned:
1.
The Government Advocates, while appearing in a newly
instituted case, before State Administrative
Tribunal, may and rather should accept the service
of notice and receive the copy of application etc.
from the Tribunal. However, on the first date of
hearing at the time of receipt of notice, the
Government Advocate should not waive of the service
of notice in the case and should invariably insist
upon the Tribunal by making a request to allow them
some time for consulting the Government Departments
and for obtaining their version before hearing them
as per provision of section 24(b) of the
Administrative Tribunal Act. In case such time and
opportunity is allowed by the Tribunal before
passing an interim order, the Government Advocate
should invariably contact Administrative
Secretary/Head of Department or any other
responsible Officer of the department concerned so
as to obtain the reply/version of the department
within limited time of adjournment before arguing
the case in the Tribunal. In the event of Tribunal
passing an interim injunction order on first date of
hearing without waiting for Government reply, as it
can legitimately do in urgent cases, the Government
Advocate should insist upon the Tribunal to record
its reasons for passing the interim injunction order
as is the requirement of the law. In such cases, the
Government Advocate may also insist upon the
Tribunal to record in its order the request for
grant of time and opportunity for obtaining the
Government version.
In the event of Tribunal passing an injunction order
with or without recording reasons on the first date
of hearing, the Government Advocate should
immediately convey such orders to the concerned
department and should invariably advise the
department if it is to file a writ before the
Hon’ble High Court challenging the order of the
Tribunal or should file the reply and request the
Tribunal to finally dispose of injunction
application within the stipulated period of 14 days,
for which the interim injunction order passed by
Tribunal may remain validly in force.
2. On
receiving of information/communication from the
Government Advocate with regard to the institution
of case/passing of injunction order against it, or
for fixing of a date for filing the reply by the
department, the concerned department should make all
out efforts to ensure that the reply is filed within
the period of adjournment and request made to the
Tribunal for expeditiously disposing of the
injunction application. If the interim injunction
orders are not vacated or confirmed by the Tribunal
by finally disposing of application within a period
of one month from the date of issuance of such
order, in that case, the department may bring it to
the notice of Law Secretary who, in turn, may
request the Government Advocate for expeditious
disposal of injunction application by the Tribunal
or in the alternative, for taking appropriate steps
to move the superior courts.
On
other hand, if the Government Department do not
file its reply etc. before the Tribunal despite
receiving communication/ information from Government
Advocate within a period of one month, the
Government Advocate may also bring such situations
to the notice of the Law Secretary, who, shall
approach the concerned department to do the needful
immediately. The Law Secretary may seek the
intervention of the Chief Secretary or the Hon’ble
Chief Minister, if the need be.
3. Some of
the important Government departments like Excise,
PWD and Secondary Education etc., having a large
number of court cases, are already having a
District Attorney/Dy. Distt. Attorney or Asstt.
Distt. Attorney posted with them as Law Officer for
rendering legal advice to these departments. These
Government attorneys can be utilized by the
concerned department in a more positive, fruitful
and responsible manner, rather than being utilized
for giving legal opinion alone in departmental
cases. These Government Attorneys do have a practice
licence and can appear and represent the State cases
of lesser importance,. In cases of serious nature,
where the government cases are represented by the
Advocates or Additional Advocate Generals, such
Government Advocates appointed with the department
should be invariabley asked to attend the courts
with the Advocate General and assist them by
supplying factual situation and legal view points.
Such District Attorneys should be also made
responsible for keeping a comprehensive record of
all the pending court cases of their department and
should invariably inform concerned Secretary/Head
of Department with regard to the progress of the
each case. If the District Attorney is made
responsible for keeping track of the departmental
cases, I doubt if any case may remain pending
before the Tribunal without meaningful progress.
In some other departments like
Health, I&PH and Primary Education etc. the
arrangements are being made for posting of one
District Attorney/Dy. Distt. Attorney having not
less than five years experience. Such an agreement
may meet the requirement of the departments to
engage the private advocates and no private advocate
need to be engaged by the Department except in very
rare cases.
4. In
addition to the Distt. Attorney/Dy. Distt. Attorney
where they are already posted or where they are to
be posted in accordance with proposal No.. (3)
above, the departments, without having the post of
District Attorney with them may designate one
responsible officer not below the rank of a
Superintendent for dealing with court cases. This
designated Officer like District Attorney of the
department, where they have one, should be
responsible for maintaining a register of litigation
wherein each and every case instituted by or against
the department should be registered. This Officer
should also record the progress of the case in this
register on each and every date of hearing and
should apprise his Secretary/Head of Department
about the progress of the case after every date of
hearing.
5. This has
been a genuine complaint of the Advocates
representing Government cases in various courts and
Tribunals that departmental representative often do
not reach to them on the date of hearing in the
Court and the record of such cases is not made
available to the Government Advocates well in
advance. It is very strongly recommended that each
department should depute its Distt. Attorney/Dy.
Distt. Attorney or Designated Officer to appear in
the Court with the government Advocate on each and
every date of hearing for assisting the Government
Advocate with factual material and by supporting
record of the case. The Government Advocate may be
requested to bring it to the notice of the concerned
Secretary/Head of Department if the departmental
representative, do not contact them well in advance
in connection with the hearing of a case.
The above guidelines/instructions, if implemented
faithfully and sincerely by all concerned, may go a
long way in providing the effective prosecution of
Government cases before the Himachal Pradesh
Administrative Tribunal. It is earnestly hoped that
all concerned shall implement the guidelines in true
spirit.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(RAMESHWAR
SHARMA)
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
No. LLR-E(9)1/88-III
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
DEPARTMENT OF LAW
From:
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
To
All the Administrative Secretaries
to the Govt. of H.P.,
Shimla-2.
Dated: Shimla-2, the 19th February, 2001
Subject.—Submission
of files to the Law Department for seeking legal
opinion.
Sir,
Of late, it has
been observed that some of departments, while
submitting a case to the Law Department for seeking
legal opinion, have fixed a deadline for tendering
of opinion by the Law Department. While this
department appreciates the urgency of the
departments in seeking opinion in some cases, the
departments should also appreciate that the Law
Department has to do a special type of job involving
lot of research and study before tendering its
opinion. Therefore, it is neither possible nor
permissible for the departments to comprehend the
time to be taken by the Law Department in giving
opinion to a particular case. In any case, the Law
Department has its own priorities in dealing with
the cases at a given time and it is not acceptable
to this department that any other departments should
meddle with the colander fixed by the Law Department
for its working.
In these
circumstances, it is requested that the
Administrative Departments, while seeking legal
opinion of this department, should refrain
themselves from fixing any deadline for tendering of
opinion by this department. Of course, the
departments are always at liberty to highlight their
urgency in a given case or discuss the matter
directly with the Law Secretary in case of any
emergency. However, to avoid any controversy or
unsavoury situation, it is requested that no
definite deadline be fixed in such cases.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(RAMESHWAR
SHARMA)
LR-cum-Secretary
(Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
Immediate
No. LLR-E(2)1/94-II
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
To
The Addl. Advocate General,
Tribunal Cell, Shimla-2.
Dated: Shimla-2, the 12th April, 2001
Subject.—Expeditious
disposal of cases by Himachal Pradesh Administrative
Tribunal.
Sir,
In response to
our letter of even Nil. dated 1-2-2001 on the
subject cited above, various Departments/boards &
Corporations of the State Government have supplied
the list of cases (consolidated list enclosed on
which the interim stay had been granted by the
Hon’ble HPAT and though replies have been filed by
the Departments but the cases have not yet been
taken up for hearing by the Hon’ble Tribunal for a
considerable long time resulting continuation of
interim stay.
I am, therefore,
direct to say that you may kindly approach the
Hon’ble Tribunal for expeditious disposal of these
cases and for the decision of stay applications.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(RAMESHWAR SHARMA)
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to
the
Ensls.
As above
Government of Himachal
Pradesh.
No. LLR-B(14)3/99
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
To
All the Administrative
Secretaries to the Govt. of H.P.
Dated: Shimla-2, the 8th August, 2001
Subject.—Constitution
of various Committees and the Meetings held by the
Administrative Departments.
Sir,
It is being
observed that the Administrative Departments while
constituting certain committees include the LR-cum-Secretary
(Law) as a Member of such Committees. Quite often,
the LR-cum-Secretary (Law) is also required
to attend the departmental meetings held by various
Administrative Departments. Eventually, the
findings/decisions of such Committees and meetings
are normally sent to Law Department for vetting.
Therefore, at occasions, it becomes difficult and
embarrassing for LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to
dispassionately analyse or to differ with the
proposals of such Committees where he himself was a
party in such meetings/ committees.
Otherwise also, a
considered legal opinion is difficult to be given at
the spur of the moment without proper study.
Therefore, the presence of Law Secretary, in such
meetings of committees, is not of much importance.
Consequently, it
is requested that the Administrative
Departments should ordinarily avoid to include the
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) while constituting
such committees or holding meetings by them for
taking a departmental decision which is ultimately
to be vetted by the Law Department. Unless it is
statutorily required to associate the LR-cum-Secretary
(Law), the departments may associate the Special
Secretary (Law) or Additional Secretary (Law) in
such committees/meetings where the presence of Law
Officer is considered necessary.
Of course, the
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) shall be readily
available for consultations to any department of the
Government as and when considered necessary by
Department to do so.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(RAMESHWAR SHARMA)
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to
the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
No. LLR-E(10)2/81
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to
the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
To
All the District Attorneys,
in Himachal Pradesh.
Dated: Shimla-2, the 6th February, 2003
Subject.—
Non-supply of legal opinion by the District
Attorneys alongwith the certified copies of court
Awards/Judgement.
Sir,
It has been
brought to the notice of this Government by the
Director, Prosecution and Additional Secretary to
the Government of Punjab on the cited subject that
many times certified copies of the judgments/awards
passed by the various courts alongwith your legal
opinion are not being supplied well in time to the
concerned departments/State Governments which cause
delay for filing further appeals.
Keeping in
view the above position, it has not been decided
that in future after the delivery of judgment/award
of the case, the concerned District Attorney will
immediately collect the copy of judgment/award and
send the same alongwith his legal opinion to the
quarter concerned.
This may be
given TOP PRIORITY.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Deputy Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
__________
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
OFFICE ORDER
Dated: Shimla-2, the 13th March, 2003
No. LLR-E(9)-1/88-iii(Loose).—It
has been decided by the Government that Shri J.S.
Attri, Advocate will also represent the State of
H.P. in the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India as
Advocate–on-record both for Civil and Criminal Cases
on the terms and conditions as contained in this
department office Order of even No. dated 9-7-1998,
with immediate effect.
Sd/-
(J. L. GUPTA)
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
No. LLR-E (10) 2/81
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL
PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
The LR-cum-Secretary
(Law ) to the
Govt. of Himachal
Pradesh.
To
1. LR &
Secretary to Govt., Haryana,
Law &
Legislative Deptt. SCO No. 15,
Sector-11,
Panchkula.
2. Director
Prosecution & Litigation and Additional Secretary to
Govt., Punjab at Chandigarh.
Dated Shimla-171002, the
17th April, 2003
Subject-—Non
supply of legal opinion by the District Attorneys
alongwith the certified copies of court awards/
judgement.
Sir,
It has been
brought to the notice of this department by the
District Attorney of this State, on the subject
cited above that in the H.P. Civil and Criminal
Courts ( preparation and supply of copies of
records) Rules, 2000 there is no provision to supply
the certified copies of judgement/Awards free of
costs to the State/ District Attorneys. The copying
agencies of judicial courts are issuing certified
copies at the minimum cost of about Rs. 50/- and
even more keeping in view the number of pages.
Besides this, it is also intimated by the District
Attorneys that the representatives of the concerned
departments are not coming forth to assist the
District Attorney and to arrange for the court fee
etc. on the successive dates of hearings as well as
on the date of judgement.
1. Keeping
in view the above position, this Govt. has decided
that you may kindly issue necessary directions to
all concerned departments of your State that in
future representatives of the Departments who is
well conversant with the case may attend their cases
on the successive dates of hearings as well as on
the date of judgement to assist the district
attorney concerned and to arrange the necessary
court fee etc.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(J. L. GUPTA)
LR-cum-Secretary ( Law ) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
MOST IMMEDIATE
No. LLR-E (2)1/94-Vol-II.
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL
PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
The LR-cum-Secretary
(Law ) to the
Government of
Himachal Pradesh.
To
1. All the
Administrative Secretaries to the Govt. of H.P.
2. All the
Heads of Departments, Himachal Pradesh.
3. All the
Deputy Commissioners, Himachal Pradesh.
4. All the
Chairmen/ Managing Directors/Registrar of Boards/
Cor-porations/ Universities in Himachal Pradesh.
Dated Shimla- 171002, the 26th
April, 2003.
Subject.—Delay
in filling replies in a large number of important
court matters pertaining to High Court/ H.P.
Administrative Tribunal.
Sir,
I am directed to
say that it has come to the notice of the Hon’ble
Chief Minister that in a large number of important
court cases of Supreme Court/High Court/ H.P.
Administrative Tribunal and other courts replies are
not being filed by various departments/ Corporations
and boards of the State Government within the time
granted by the Courts, on account of which Hon’ble
Supreme Court/ High Court/ Tribunal have decided
some cases ex-party. This not only result in
embarrassment to the Govt. but public interest too
suffers and also causing huge loss to the
Government. This act has been viewed seriously by
the Hon’ble Chief Minister.
In view of the
above, you are requested to ensure that the reply to
the court cases is filed invariably within the
stipulated period so that the interest of the Govt.
does not suffer. Any lapse in this regard will be
viewed seriously and defaulting officers will be
held personally responsible for such delays.
This may be
treated as most urgent.
The receipt of
this communication may be acknowledged.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(J. L. GUPTA)
LR-cum-Secretary (Law ) to the
. Government of
Himachal Pradesh.
No. LLR-E (2) 1/94-Vol-II.
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
The LR-cum-
Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
To
1. All the
administrative Secretaries to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-171002.
2. All the
Heads of Departments, Himachal Pradesh.
3. All the
Deputy Commissioner/ Superintendents of Police,
Himachal Pradesh.
4. All the
Chairmen/ Managing Directors/ Registrar of Boards/
Corporations/ Universities in H.P.
Dated Shimla-171002, the 10th
November, 2003
Subject.—Proper
defence of court cases in various courts.
Sir/ Madam ,
The Hon’ble Chief
Minister has expressed concern on high percentage of
acquittal in criminal cases. He pointed out that the
Government is suffering loss of crores of rupees
because of negligence and inefficient handling of
civil cases. In this context, the instructions have
been issued by this department on 26-4-2003 and
19-5-2003, these instructions be observed in letter
and spirit by all the concerned so that better
results could be obtained in the state.
2. The
criminal cases fail interalia, because of faulty
investigation. In cases where there is proper
investigation, the cases may fail because the
witnesses either turn hostile or are not in position
to give correct version of the facts before the
courts. For avoiding faulty investigation, Secretary
(Home-Prosecution) may ensure that the proper
training be imparted to the investigating officers.
Periodical refresher courses should also be
organised to keep the investigating officers
acquainted with the latest technology of
investigation. The Secretary ( Home-Prosecution)
should thoroughly peruse the judgements of criminal
courts and the infirmities pointed out in the
investigation of criminal cases should be brought to
the notice of public prosecutors so that the Public
Prosecutors get the defects of investigation removed
before the challan is put in the court. If any
infirmity is noticed in the conduct of cases by a
Public prosecutor, suitable action be taken against
him.
With respect to
statement of witness, the Investigating Officer
should be directed not to record the statements of
witnesses in difficult language because the
witnesses may not be able to properly reproduce
their statements before the court. The statements
should be recorded in a simple language so that
witness may reproduce as to what he has witnessed.
With respect to hostile witnesses, the Investigating
Officer should keep a watch on the witnesses so that
they do not change their statements because of the
fear or influence of the accused party and
Investigating Officer should invariably remain
present specially during the trial of serious cases.
To achieve better result, Investigation Officers
should not ordinarily be transferred to other wings
of police. Where there is paucity of Public
Prosecutors, sub-section(4) of section 24 of
Criminal Procedure Code be invoked by the respective
District Magistrates.
In civil cases,
the department concerned has to swing into action
from the date a notice under section 80 C.P.C. is
received. A reply to a notice under section 80
C.P.C. must ordinarily be given. If the claim is
found genuine, the matter must be settled to avoid
litigation, costs and interest. If matter is not to
be settled, the department should start collecting
the material relating to the case. The official
nominated under para 7 of this department letter of
even No. dated 19-5-2003, should make an entry to
this effect in the register and submit his report to
the Head of the department for taking further
action.
In case, it is
found that Public Prosecutors/District Attorneys or
Advocate General, etc. do not co-operate the
Department or authorities, the matter should
immediately be brought to the notice of this
department
In Land
acquisition cases, the court are awarding interest
@ 15% per Annum whereas the bank rates are quite
less. Hence, Secretary(Revenue) should initiate the
process of amending the relevant provisions of Land
Acquisition Act.
It has also be
observed that only land Acquisition Collector is
made party in land reference cases but the
Department acquiring the land is not made party. In
such the District Attorney should make an
application to the court for making the acquiring
Department also a party so that the interest of the
Department is watched.
To monitor proper
handling of Government cases in the various courts,
the respective Deputy Commissioners along with
Superintendent of Police and District Attorney will
held quarterly meetings and progress achieved
therein be intimated to this department.
State level
meeting will be held quarterly under the
Chairmanship of Secretary (Law) along with Ld.
Advocate General and Director of Prosecution wherein
the progress of Civil & Criminal cases will be
monitored.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(J. L. GUPTA)
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
No. LLR-E (2) 1/94-Vol-II.
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
The LR-cum-
Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
To
1. All the
administrative secretaries to the
the
Government of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-171002.
2. All the
Heads of Departments, in Himachal Pradesh.
3. All the
Deputy Commissioners in Himachal Pradesh.
4. All the
Chairmen/ Managing Directors/ Registrar of Boards/
Corporation/ Universities in H.P.
Dated Shimla-171002, the 8th
December, 2003
Subject.—Filing
of reply/written statement within stipulated period
i.e. 30 days from the service of summons as
per the Amended provision of Rule I of Order 8
C.P.C.
Sir,
I am to say that
the Advocate General, Himachal Pradesh has brought
to the notice of the Govt. that the concerned
Departments are not filing the written statement
within stipulated period as provided under Rule 1
Order 8 CPC after the service of summons, for one or
the other reason resulting thereby loss of huge
exchequer to the Government. This lapse occurs due
to the fault of Department and their officers.
According to the
amended provision of CPC the reply or written
statement on behalf of the Government is to be
filed within 30 days from the service of summons
upon the Government as well as their officers as
provided in Rule I of Order 8 CPC and further
thereafter 60 days as per the discretion of the
court. I am, therefore, request you to ensure that
reply/written statement is filed within stipulated
period as provided under Rule 1 Order 8 CPC, so that
the interest of the Government does not suffer. Any
lapse in this regard will be viewed seriously.
The above
instructions may please be adhered to strictly.
Please
acknowledge the receipt.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(J. L. GUPTA)
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
No. LLR-E (10) 5/86-II.
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
The LR-cum-
Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
To
All the District
Attorneys,
in Himachal
Pradesh.
Dated Shimla-171002, the 20th
December, 2003
Subject.—Counsel
fee bills for the defence of other States and Union
of India.
Sir,
I am directed to
say that it has come to the notice of the Government
that the concerned District Attorneys/Deputy
District Attorneys/Assistant District Attorneys are
sending their Counsel fee bills direct to the other
State Governments/U.O.I. The Government pleaders
are required to send their counsel fee bills to this
Department for necessary sanction. After the
sanction of these bills by this Department, the
concerned Government Advocates submit their counsel
fee bill to the concerned State Government for
necessary payments. Out of sanctioned amount 1/3rd
amount is required to deposit by the Government
pleaders into the Government Treasury as per
provision of H.P.F.R.Vol. I as State share. You are,
therefore, requested to send the details of last
three years of counsel fee drawn from the other
State Govts./U.O.I. It may also be intimated
whether the 1/3rd amount of State share
in these cases were deposited in Govt. Treasury or
not by the concerned Govt. pleaders as per rule
under reference. For future all the counsel fee
bills in question may kindly be sent to this
department for sanction in first instance.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Under Secretary
(Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
No. LLR-E (2) 1/94-Vol-II
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
The LR-cum-
Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
To
1. All the
administrative secretaries to the
the
Government of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-171002.
2. All the
Heads of Departments, in Himachal Pradesh.
3. All the
Deputy Commissioners in Himachal Pradesh.
Dated Shimla-171002, the 1st
January, 2004
Subject.—Regarding
Supreme Court Matters.
Sir,
I am directed to
say that Shri J.S. Attri, Additional Advocate
General-cum-Advocate-on-Record at Delhi has
brought to the notice of the Government that there
are certain cases which reached to his office after
the expiry of period of limitation for filing the
Special Leave Petition in the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
The period of filing the SLP from the date of
judgement of the High Court is 90 days. For the
purpose of study, drafting and preparing of Special
Leave Petition, he requires at least four weeks, as
such, the exercise by the concerned Department for
taking opinion of Law Department and decision of the
Administrative Department should be done within 60
days from the date of impugned judgment Order. The
file should reach immediately to his office enabling
him to get sufficient time for study, conference,
preparation of SLP and thereafter filing the same in
the Hon’ble Supreme court. There are instances that
the cases dismissed in High Court on the point of
limitation, reach his office much after the expiry
of limitation for filing Special Leave Petition. It
has also been noticed that there are under lines in
the certified copies of orders/judgements issued by
Hon’ble High Court , such under lines in the
certified copies are not accepted in the Registry of
the Hon’ble Supreme Court as it is treated as
tempering in certified copy of the judgement/order
of the High Court. Besides this, he has also
intimated that the officials of some departments
have made correspondence with the Registry for
filing the documents in the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
The State Government has established a regular Legal
Cell, in Himachal Bhawan, Delhi as Liaison Office
and all the documents are to be filed through the
Advocate-on-record, appointed by the Government .
Standing of such document directly to the Supreme
Court is treated highly objectionable by the
Registry of the Supreme Court and such instances are
reported to the Hon’ble Apex court. In order not to
repeat such type of lapses/objectionable acts, it
has been decided that the following instructions be
strictly complied:—
(1) In cases
where SLP/Appeal is required to be filed, all the
codal formalities should be completed within 60 days
from the date of impugned judgment/order and the
file case should reach in the office of the
Advocate-on-Record, New Delhi at least four weeks
before the expiry of the limitation period.
(2) No under
line or any addition and alteration should be done
in the certified copies of orders/judgements issued
by the Hon’ble High Court.
(3) All
documents which are required to be filed in any case
before the Hon’ble Supreme Court should be filed
through the Advocate-on-Record.
I am, therefore, to
request you to ensure that the above instructions
are adhered to strictly.
Please acknowledge the
receipt.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(J. L.
GUPTA)
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to
the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
Most Immediate.
No. LLR-E(2)1/94-Vol-II.
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
The LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to
the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
To
1. All the Administrative Secretaries to the
Government of Himachal
Pradesh,Shimla-171002.
2.
All the Heads of Departments, Himachal
Pradesh.
3.
All Deputy Commissioners/Superintendents of
Police, H.P.
4.
All the Chairmen/Managing Directors/Registrar
of Boards/ Corporations/Universities in H.P.
Dated Shimla-171002, the 3rd March, 2005
Subject.—Proper defence of court cases in
various courts.
Sir/Madam,
I am
directed to refer to this Department letter
of even number dated 10-11-2003 on the subject
cited above and to say that in para 3 of the said
instructions it has been provided that where there
is paucity of Public Prosecutors, Sub Section(4) of
Section 24 of Criminal Procedure code be invoked by
the respective District Magistrates.
It has been brought to the notice of
State Government that the District Magistrates by
invoking the provision of Sub Section (4) of Section
24 of Cr.P.C. are appointing advocates as Public
Prosecutors without having regard to the provision
of Sub Section(6) of Section 24 of the code.
According to said sub Section where exist a regular
cadre of Public Prosecutors the State Government can
appoint only Public Prosecutors from amongst the
persons constituting such cadre. Since in the State
of Himachal Pradesh there is a regular cadre of
Public Prosecutors, therefore, the provisions of sub
Section (4) can not be invoked by the District
Magistrates. However, as per proviso to sub Section
(6) of Section 24 of Cr.P.C. the State Government
can appoint Public Prosecutors only if suitable
person is not available in the cadre of Public
Prosecutors, but this proviso can be invoked in
special circumstances. In view of position
explained above the words “where there is paucity of
Public Prosecutors, Sub Section (4) of Section 24
Criminal Procedure Code be invoked by the respective
District Magistrates” appearing at the end of para 3
of said instructions shall be deleted forthwith.
Further as per provision of Sub
Section (3) of section 25 of the Cr.P.C. when no
Assistant Public Prosecutor is available for the
purpose of any particular case, the District
Magistrate has been empowered to appoint any other
person to be Assistant Public Prosecutor incharge of
that case. No doubt sub Section (3) of Section 25 of
Cr.P.C. empowers the District Magistrate to appoint
any person to be Assistant Public Prosecutor but
such appointment can not be made as whole time to
defend all State cases. Under this sub Section
District Magistrate can appoint a person to be
Assistant Public Prosecutor for the purpose of a
particular case only.
It is, therefore, desirable that the
District Magistrates while exercising powers under
sub-Section (3) of Section 25 of Cr.P.C. shall keep
in view the scope of said sub-Section (3) as
explained above.
The instructions dated 10-11-2003
issued by this Department shall be deemed to be
amended and supplemented to above extent.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(SURINDER SINGH THAKUR)
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to the
Government
of Himachal Pradesh.
___________
Most
Immediate.
No. LLR-E(2)1/94-Vol-II
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
The LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to
the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
To
1. All the Administrative
Secretaries to the
Government of Himachal
Pradesh, Shimla-171002.
2. All the Heads of
Departments, Himachal Pradesh.
3. All the Deputy
Commissioners in H.P.
4. All Superintendents of
Police, H.P.
5. All the Chairmen/Managing
Directors/Registrar of Boards/
Corporations/Universities in H.P.
Dated
Shimla-171002, the 8th June, 2005.
Subject.—Decision on O.A/C.W.P. treated to be as
representation.
Sir,
I am directed to say that Additional
Advocate General State of Himachal Pradesh, has
brought to the notice of the Government that in
several cases, the Original Applications are sent as
representation to be decided by the competent
authority. In such cases it may be kept in mind that
all the representations whether regarding pension
matters/transfer/salary/fixation etc., are decided
by way of a detailed, speaking order, giving reasons
for the findings arrived at in a time bond manner.
The decisions may not be cryptic but may contain
adequate reasons so that the second round of
litigation could be avoided.
In view of the above, it has been decided by the
Government that in future the representations may be
decided in detail speaking order, giving reason from
the findings arrived at.
The above instructions may please be adhered to
strictly and brought to the notice of all concerned.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Under Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
—————
No. LLR-E(2)1/94.Vol-II
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
The LR-cum-Secretary
(Law) to the
Government of
Himachal Pradesh.
To
1. All the Administrative
Secretaries to the
Government of Himachal
Pradesh.
2. All the Heads of
Departments, Himachal Pradesh.
3. All the Deputy
Commissioners in Himachal Pradesh.
4. All the Superintendents of
Police in Himachal Pradesh.
5. All the Chairmen/Managing
Directors/Registrar of Boards/
Corporations/Universities in Himachal Pradesh.
Dated Shimla-171002, the 27th June, 2005
Subject.—F.A.O.263/96
titled Kehar Singh V/S State of Himachal
Pradesh regarding pressurizing the Revenue Officers
by the various functionaries of the State.
Sir/Madam,
The Hon’ble High Court in the above
titled case has expressed its dissatisfaction and
dismay, the manner in which the Revenue Officer was
pressurized by the various functionaries of the
State by sending demi-official letter for seeking
adjournment ,while dealing with the matter u/s 163
(3) of the H.P. Land Revenue Act in his capacity as
a Civil Court, thereby lowering the prestige of the
officer, as if he was subordinate officer to them
whereas, he was entrusted with the judicial powers,
the State was at best one party or litigant before
him. The Hon’ble High Court has also observed that
no litigant is expected to correspond or send
letters, make request for adjournment telephonically
to the Presiding Officer of a court, all such
requests or any other request can only be made by
filing application(s) before the court, lest the
common public will have no faith in the system by
such acts and shall loose trust in the majesty of
law, if Officers who are entrusted with judicial
powers and who discharge judicial functions are
treated like the revenue officer aforesaid. The
above observations of the Hon’ble High Court not
only reflects the working of the State Govt. or its
instrumentalities but also results in embarrassment
to the Government and even the public interest too
suffers a lot causing loss to the Government.
Therefore, this act of negligence has been viewed
seriously by the State Government.
2. Thus, against the aforesaid
background, I have been directed to convey you that
in future when judicial or quasi judicial functions
are discharged by administrative officer(s) then
the State and its instrumentalities should act like
a normal litigant and no such letters, wireless
messages or telephonic conversation with regard to
the cases shall be exchanged with such officers by
any of the officer(s) of the State.
3. Therefore, you are
requested to circulate these instructions to all the
concerned and to ensure that the above act shall not
be repeated by any of the officer in future and any
lapse in this regard will be viewed seriously and
defaulting officer (s)/official (s) shall be held
personally responsible for such a lapse.
The above instructions may please be
adhered to strictly by all concerned.
Please acknowledge the receipt.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/
(SURINDER SINGH THAKUR),
LR-cum-Secretary (Law) to
the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
No. LLR-E(2)1/94.Vol-II.
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
The LR-cum-Secretary
(Law) to the
Government of
Himachal Pradesh.
To
All the District Attorneys/Deputy District
Attorneys/Assistant
District Attorneys in H.P.
.
Dated Shimla-2,the 6th July, 2005
Subject.—Defending
of Court cases in the Labour Court/State Consumer
Commission, Distt. Consumer Form and Commissioner
Workmen Compensation Courts.
Sir,
I am directed to say that it has
been brought to the notice of the Government that
oftenly the representation in State Govt. cases is
not being made by the District Attorneys/Deputy
District Attorneys/Assistant District Attorneys
before the Labour Court/State Consumer Commission,
District Consumer Form and Commissioner Worksmen
Compensation Courts for one or the other reasons as
a consequence of which it lands the Government in
an embarrassing situation besides public interest
too suffers. I am, therefore, directed to request
you to ensure that in future the State Government
cases before the aforesaid courts should invariably
be conducted defended properly by the Assistant
District Attorneys within their respective
jurisdictions. In case they are already engaged in
other courts or are unable to appear before the
said courts/forum due to certain reasons in that
event the District Attorney concerned shall make the
local arrangement by deputing one ADA or in the
alternative inform the concerned department to make
the arrangement of a private lawyer in consultation
with the Law Department through their Administrative
Department as per rules.
2. These instructions should
be adhered to strictly.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Deputy Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
No. LLR-E(2)1/94.Vol-II
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
The LR-cum-Secretary
(Law) to the
Government of
Himachal Pradesh.
To
1. All
the Administrative Secretaries to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
2. All
the Heads of Departments in Himachal Pradesh.
3. All
the Deputy Commissioners in H. P.
4. All
the Superintendents of Police in H. P.
5. All the Chairmen/Managing
Directors/Registrar of Boards/
Corporations/Universities in Himachal Pradesh.
Dated Shimla-171002,the 21st July,
2005
Subject.—FAO
(WCA) No.438 of 2004 titled Ram Dass Versus
Secretary Agriculture to the Govt. of H.P. and
Another.
Sir/Madam,
The Hon’ble High Court in the above
titled case has expressed its dis-satisfaction and
dismay at the manner in which proceedings are being
undertaken by the State Government before different
Tribunals/Forums. Besides this the Hon’ble High
Court has also observed that no Law Officer was
deputed to properly defend the interest of the
State. Only departmental representative had been
appearing on different hearings throughout the
proceedings. It is not the first case where this
Court has come across such situation where the case
was being dragged on unnecessarily without having
any legal defence. It has come to the notice of the
Hon’ble High Court in the past also, that even
where State could legitimately save money by taking
suitable measures, nothing was done not only to save
money, but also to ward off litigation in
appropriate cases. The above observations of the
Hon’ble High Court not only reflects upon the
working of the State Govt. or its instrumentalities
but also results in embarrassment to the Government
and even the public interest too suffers a lot
causing financial loss to the Government. Thus
against the aforesaid background, I am directed to
circulate the following guidelines/ instructions for
implementation and necessary action on the part of
the all concerned:—
(1) In Court cases, all the
Administrative Departments shall refer the matter to
Law Department for legal opinion by presenting full
facts of the case, as to see whether the case is fit
for appeal or not. After obtaining the opinion of
Law Department regarding the desirability of appeal,
the Administrative Departments will take decision at
the level of competent authority as per Rules of
Business of the Government and only thereafter take
further steps for filing appeal in the Higher
Courts.
(2) Some of the important
Government Departments having a large number of
court cases, are already having a District
Attorney/Dy. District Attorney/Assistant District
Attorney/Sr.Law Officer/Law Officers posted with
them for rendering legal advice to these
departments. These Government Advocates can be
utilized by the concerned department in a more
positive, fruitful and responsible manner, rather
than being utilized for giving legal opinion alone
in departmental cases. These Government Advocates
should be invariably asked to attend the courts with
the Advocate General/Additional Advocate General as
the case may be and assist them by supplying
factual position and general view points. Such
Government Advocates should be also made responsible
for keeping a comprehensive record of all the
pending court cases of their department and should
invariably inform concerned Secretary/Head of
Department with regard to the progress of each
case. The Government Advocates be made responsible
for keeping track of the departmental cases under
their control, and if any case remains pending
before the courts without meaningful progress, they
shall be held responsible.
(3) The Departments, which are
not having the post of District Attorneys/Deputy
District Attorneys/ Sr. Law Officers/Law Officers
may designate one responsible officer not below the
rank of a Supdt for dealing with court cases. This
designated Officer, should be responsible for
maintaining a register of litigation wherein each
and every case instituted by or against the
department should be registered. This Officer should
also record the progress of the case in this
register on each and every date of hearing and
should apprise his Secretary/Head of Department
about the progress of the case after every date of
hearing.
(4) It is very strongly
recommended that each Department should depute its
Distt. Attorney/Dy. District Attorney/Sr. Law
Officer/Law Officer or the Designated Officer to
assist the Advocate General/Addl. Advocate General
as the case may be on each and every date of
hearing with factual material and by supporting
record of the case.
The above guidelines/instructions may be implemented
faithfully and sincerely by all concerned so that
Government cases before the various Courts may be
prosecuted effectively any failure to do so will be
viewed seriously.
Kindly acknowledge receipt of the
Communication.
Yours faithfully,
SD/-
(SURINDER SINGH
THAKUR),
LR-cum-Secretary
(Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
Most Immediate
No. LLR-E(2)1/94.Vol-II
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From:
The LR-cum-Pr.
Secretary (Law) to the
Government
of Himachal Pradesh.
To
1.
All the Administrative Secretaries to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
2.
All the Heads of Departments,
Himachal Pradesh.
3.
All the Deputy Commissioners,
Himachal Pradesh.
4.
All the Superintendents of Police in
Himachal Pradesh.
Dated Shimla-171002, the 25th
October, 2005
Subject.—Defence of
Officers through private Advocates.
Sir,
I am directed to say that the Ld.
Advocate General, State of Himachal Pradesh, has
brought to the notice of the Government that in some
cases, the SDMs/Tehsildars in which they were
arrayed as respondents in their official capacity
and not in personal capacity, had engaged their own
counsel for defending their official acts. In this
regard, the Ld. Advocate General, has clarified that
these officers had no right to engage their private
counsel in such cases as they were not impleaded in
their personal capacity (by name) as respondents.
Apart from this, no permission from the competent
authority (the Government) had been obtained to
allow them to be represented by private counsel.
This practice of engaging private counsel in
Government cases by the concerned officers, when
their official acts are challenged in the court
apart from being undesirable are also completely
unwarranted. No Government officer who is impleaded
as respondent in his official capacity has a right
to be represented by a private counsel. As a matter
of facts such officers are to be defended by the Ld.
Advocate General and his team unless they are
impleaded in their personal capacity. This is a most
unhealthy tendency which is developing in the State
and deserves to be put to end at this very stage.
In this regard, it is further clarified that no
officer without the prior approval of the Law
Department shall engage a private Advocate for his
defence or his subordinate even when they are
impleaded as respondents/defendants (by name) in
their personal capacity. In case, they do so, the
State Government would not refund the counsel-fee at
any cost.
Therefore, against the above
background, you are requested to ensure that no
Private Advocate, for the defence of any
officer/official be engaged without the prior
approval of the Law Department, so that neither
State Exchequer is unnecessarily burdened nor the
State interest suffers. Thus, it has been decided by
the State Government that any lapse in this regard
will be viewed seriously and defaulting officers
shall be held personally responsible for such
lapse. You are also requested to ensure that no
counsel fee in those cases to the private counsel
should be sanctioned by any of the authorities in
their favour, in which approval of Law Department
is not obtained.
Please acknowledge receipt of this
letter.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(SURINDER SINGH THAKUR)
LR-cum-Principal
Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
_________
No.
LLR-E (2) 1/94-Vol-II
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW
DEPARTMENT
From :
The LR-cum- Secretary (Law)
to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
To
1. All the Administrative
Secretaries to the Govt. of H.P.
2. All the Heads of
Departments in Himachal Pradesh.
3. All the Deputy
Commissioners in Himachal Pradesh.
4. All the Superintendents of
Police in Himachal Pradesh.
5. All the Chairmen/ Managing
Directors/ Registrar of Boards/ Corporations/
Universities in H.P.
Dated
Shimla-171002, the 19th June, 2004
Subject.—Non-compliance
of orders of Hon’ble High Court and no-filing of
replies thereof.
Sir,
I am directed to say that the Ld.
Advocate General, State of Himachal Pradesh, has
brought to the notice of the Chief Secretary to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh that in most of the
cases, invariably replies are being filed by
various Departments/Corporations and Boards of the
State Government, within the time granted by the
Hon’ble High Court, on account of which the Hon’ble
Court has started taking a very serious view for not
filing of replies in time and in some case the State
has been burdened with heavy costs.
This not only adversely reflects the
working of the State Government or its
instrumentalities but also results in embarrassment
to the Government and even the public interest too
suffers a lot causing huge loss to the Government.
This act of negligence has been viewed seriously by
the State Government.
Therefore, against the above
background, you are requested to ensure that the
reply in the court case(s) is/are filed within the
stipulated time, so that neither State exchequer is
unnecessarily burdened nor the State interest
suffers. Thus it has been decided by the State
Government that any lapse in this regard will be
viewed seriously and defaulting
officer(s)/official(s) shall be held personally
responsible for such lapse and if any cost is
imposed by the Hon’ble Court for the negligence that
may be recovered from the defaulting
officer/official as the case may be.
This may be treated as most urgent.
Please acknowledge receipt of this
letter
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(SURINDER SINGH THAKUR)
LR-cum-Secretary
(Law) to
the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
—————
No. LLR(Lit)A(4)1/92
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From :
The LR-cum-
Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal
Pradesh.
To
1.
All the Administrative Secretaries to the
Government of Himachal
Pradesh, Shimla-171002.
2.
All the Divisional Commissioners in Himachal
Pradesh.
3.
All the Heads of Departments in Himachal
Pradesh.
4.
All the Deputy Commissioners in Himachal
Pradesh.
5.
All the Superintendents of Police in Himachal
Pradesh.
6.
All the District Attorneys in Himachal
Pradesh
7.
All the Deputy District Attorneys in Himachal
Pradesh
8.
All the Asstt. District Attorneys in Himachal
Pradesh
Dated Shimla-171002, the 2nd
April, 1992.
Subject.—Conciliation
of cases by or against the Government pending in the
various courts in Himachal Pradesh.
Sir,
The matter regarding
conciliation of cases by or against the Government
instituted/pending in the various Courts in H.P. was
engaging the attention of the Government for some
time past. After careful examination and
consideration of the matter and keeping in view the
new legislative policy to minimise the cases in the
Courts and ensuring that the litigation comes to an
end by way of an amicable settlement of the dispute,
the government has decided to constitute District
and State Level Committees with powers to settle the
dispute amicably on behalf of the State in the
Conciliation Courts and in the Lok Adalats. The
constitution and function of such committees shall
be as under:—
2. The
District level committee shall consist of the
following members:—
1.
Deputy
Commissioner Chairman
2.
District Attorney/Assistant
Member
District
Attorney.
3. District level Officer of
the Member
concerned
department.
4. Assistant Commissioner to
Member Secretary.
Deputy
Commissioner.
[
FUNCTION AND POWERS OF THE
DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE :
3. This
Committee will identify the cases pending in any
court in the District in which the State of Himachal
Pradesh or any department of the State or any Public
Officer of the State in his official capacity is a
party to the proceedings. It will assess the
feasibility of the cases or proceedings or matter
for the purpose of conciliation. It shall be the
duty of the District Level Officer of the concerned
department involved in such litigation to bring such
matter to the notice of the Member Secretary who
shall as soon as possible place the matter for
consideration of the District Level Committee. The
District Level Committee shall also consult the
opposite party to ascertain his terms of settlement
and if both the parties agree on a certain proposal
then the same will be referred to the State Level
Committee. In case the opposite party does not
participate despite of notice District Committee
will consider all aspects keeping in view the merit
of the case and will consider the proposal made
either by the opposite party to the suit or
proceeding or by the court where such suit or
proceedings is pending and then shall frame its
opinion on the proposal. It shall also keep in mind
the law, equity and merits of the case or
proceedings and submits recommendations to the State
Level Committee along with the relevant record for
the decision of the case by way of conciliation or
natural settlement through its Member Secretary.
4. The State
Level Committee will consist of the following
members:—
1. Chief
Secretary
Chairman
2. Secretary
(Finance)
Member
3. Secretary
of the concerned Deptt.
Member
4. Secretary
(Law)
Member Secretary.
FUNCTION AND POWERS OF THE STATE
LEVEL COMMITTEE:
5. (i)
The State Level Committee shall consider the
proposal for settlement as recommended by the
District Level Committee. Secretary of this
Committee shall convene a meeting of the State Level
Committee in consultation with the Chairman as soon
as possible on receipt of the recommendations and
record from the District Level Committee. Thereafter
the Committee will take decision on such
recommendation and submit a clear cut recommendation
for the final approval of the Minister concerned.
The decision so approved by the Minister concerned
shall be communicated to the District Level
Committee through its Member Secretary with a copy
to the District Level Officer of the concerned
department, who shall then communicates the decision
of the State Level Committee to the Court concerned,
either personally or through Advocate engaged by
the State to defend its interest or through any
other Law Officer representing the State.
(ii) The
State Level Committee shall also look into the
proposal either from the party or the Court
concerned for conciliation or settlement by mutual
consent of the case or proceeding pending in the
State High Court or F.C. (Appeals) or any State
Forum or Body. The highest Officer of the concerned
department will bring such matter to the notice of
Secretary, State Level Committee, who shall then
convene meeting of the State Level Committee in
consultation with the Chairman to consider the
proposal for the settlement and submit a clear cut
recommendation for the final approval of the
Minister concerned. The decision so approved by the
Minister concerned shall be communicated to the Head
of the concerned department who shall then
communicate the decision to the Court concerned. The
State Level Committee shall while taking its
decision also be guided by the principles of equity,
natural justice and merit of the case.
6. The
decision(s) so taken by the State Level Committee
with the final approval of the Minister concerned
either on recommendation of the District Level
Committee or on its motion shall be a decision of
the State Government and the Collector of the
District, District Attorney, Deputy District
Attorney and Assistant District Attorney shall be
entitled to give statement on behalf of the State
regarding the composition on such terms as may be
conveyed to him and such statement shall be binding
upon the State.
7. These
Committees shall consider the possibility of
conciliation of Civil and Revenue Cases in general
though the priority shall be given to the civil
suits/cases.
8. The
above decision of the Government has come into force
at once and be strictly followed by all
Departments/Officers in future. It shall be
responsibility of the concerned Secretary to ensure
strict compliance of the decision of the State
Government.
The receipt of
this communication be acknowledged.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(A. L. VAIDYA)
LR-cum-Secretary(Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
No. LLR-(Lit) A( 4)-1/92
GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LAW DEPARTMENT
From
The
L.R.-cum-Principal Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
To
1. All the
Administrative Secretaries to the Government of
Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-2.
2. All the Heads of
the Departments in Himachal Pradesh.
3. All the
Divisional Commissioners in Himachal Pradesh.
4. All the Deputy
Commissioners in Himachal Pradesh.
5. All the
Superintendents of Police in Himachal Pradesh.
6. All the District
Attorneys in Himachal Pradesh.
Dated Shimla-2, the 26th
April, 2006
Subject.—Conciliation of cases by or against
the Government pending in the various courts in
Himachal Pradesh.
Sir,
I am directed to invite your kind
attention to this Department letter of even number
dated 2-4-1992 on the subject cited above. In order
to minimize the cases in the various courts of law
the matter was discussed in the meeting of Committee
of Secretaries held on 22-3-2006 under the
Chairmanship of Chief Secretary and it was decided
to reiterate the aforesaid decision of the
Government. The decision of the Government already
taken in this behalf is re-produced as under :—
“The matter regarding
conciliation of cases by or against the Government
instituted/ pending in the various courts in H.P.
was engaging the attention of the Government for
some time past. After careful examination and
consideration of the matter and keeping in view the
new legislative policy to minimize the cases in the
courts and ensuring that the litigation comes to an
end by way of an amicable settlement of the dispute,
the Government has decided to constitute District
and State Level Committees with powers to settle the
dispute amicably on behalf of the State in the
Conciliation Courts and in the Lok Adalats. The
constitution and function of such committees shall
be as under :—
The District Level Committee shall
consist of the following members :—
1. Deputy
Commissioner
Chairman
2. District Attorney/Assistant
District Attorney Member
3. District Level Officer of
the Member
concerned department.
4. Assistant Commissioner to
Commissioner Member Secretary
FUNCTION AND POWERS
OF THE DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE :
This committee will identify the
cases pending in any court in the District in which
the State of H.P. or any Department of the State or
any Public Officer of the State in his official
capacity is a party to the proceedings. It will
assess the feasibility of the cases or proceedings
or matter for the purpose of conciliation.
It shall be the duty of the District Level
Officer of the concerned Department involved in such
litigation to bring such matter to the notice of the
Member Secretary who shall as soon as possible place
the matter for consideration of the District Level
Committee . The District Level Committee shall also
consult the opposite party to ascertain his terms of
settlement and if both the parties agree on a
certain proposal then the same will be referred to
the State Level Committee. In case the opposite
party does not participate despite of notice
District Committee will consider all aspects keeping
in view the merits of the case and will consider the
proposal made either by the opposite party to the
suit or proceeding or by the Court where such suit
or proceedings is pending and then shall frame its
opinion on the proposal. It shall also keep in mind
the law, equity and merits of the case or
proceedings and submit its recommendations to the
State Level Committee alongwith the relevant record
for the decision of the case by way of conciliation
or mutual settlement through its Member Secretary.
The State Level Committee will
consist of the following members :—
1. Chief Secretary
Chairman
2. Secretary
(Finance)
Member
3. Secretary of the concerned
Department
Member
4. Secretary
(Law)
Member Secretary.
FUNCTION AND POWERS OF THE
STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE :
(i) The State Level
Committee shall consider the proposal for settlement
as recommended by the District Level Committee.
Secretary of this Committee shall convene a meeting
of the State Level Committee in consultation with
the Chairman as soon as possible on receipt of the
recommendations and record from the District Level
Committee. Thereafter, the Committee will take
decision on such recommendations and submit a clear
cut recommendation for the final approval of
Minister concerned. The decision so approved by the
Minister concerned shall be communicated to the
District Level Committee through its Member
Secretary with a copy to the District Level Officer
of the concerned Department, who shall then
communicate the decision of the State Level
Committee to the court concerned, either personally
or through Advocate engaged by the State to defend
its interest or through any other Law Officer
representing the State.
(ii) The State Level Committee
shall also look into the proposal either from the
party or the court concerned for conciliation or
settlement by mutual consent of the case or
proceeding pending in the State High Court or F.C.
(Appeals) or any State forum or body. The highest
officer of the concerned department will bring such
matter to the notice of Secretary, State Level
Committee, who shall then convene meeting of the
State Level Committee in consultation with the
Chairman to consider the proposal for the settlement
and submit a
clear cut recommendation for the final approval of
the Minister concerned. The decision so approved by
the Minister concerned shall be communicated to the
Head of the concerned Department who shall then
communicate the decision to the court concerned.
The State Level Committee shall while taking its
decision also be guided by the principles of equity,
natural justice and merit of the case.
The decision(s) so taken by the
State Level Committee with the final approval of the
Minister concerned either on recommendation of the
District Level Committee or on its motion shall be a
decision of the State Government and the Collector
of the District, District Attorney, Deputy District
Attorney and Assistant District Attorney shall be
entitled to give statement on behalf of the State
regarding the composition on such terms as may be
conveyed to him and such statement shall be binding
upon the State.
These Committees shall consider the
possibility of conciliation of Civil and Revenue
cases in general though the priority shall be given
to the civil suits/cases.
The above decision of the Government
has come into force at once and be strictly followed
by all Departments/Officers in future. It shall be
the responsibility of the concerned Secretary to
ensure strict compliance of the decision of the
State Government.”
The receipt of this communication be
acknowledged.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
L.R.-cum-Principal
Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
Endst. No. LLR(Lit)A(4)-1/92 dated
26th
April, 2006.
Copy is forwarded for information to :—
1. The Registrar General, High
Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-1.
2. The Registrar, H.P.
Administrative Tribunal, Shimla-2.
3. The Advocate
General,Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-1.
4. All the District & Sessions
Judges in Himachal Pradesh.
5. The Sr. Special Private
Secretary to the Chief Secretary,
H.P. Secretariat, Shimla-2.
6. The Private Secretary to
the Hon’ble Chief Minister, H.P. Secretariat,
Shimla-2.
Sd/-
L.R.-cum-Principal Secretary (Law) to the
Government of Himachal Pradesh.
.
Subs. for the figure ‘10’ vide
Not. No. LR.107/468/54-III, dated
3-8-1974 and subsequently subs. for the
figure
“11” vide Noti. No.
LLE-E(9)2/76, dated 22-8-1989, published in
R.H.P. dated 8-9-1990, p. 1038.
.
Subs. vide Noti. No. LLR-E(9)2/76,
dated 16-8-1982, published in R.H.P., dated
28-8-1982, p. 710.
.
Deleted vide Noti. No. LR.
107/468/54-III, dated 16-5-1974, published
in R.H.P., dated 1-6-1976, p. 921.
.
Ins. and shal l be deemed always to
have been ins. vide Noti. No.
LR-107/468/54-III, dated 6-5-1971, published
in R.H.P., dated 5-6-1971, p. 589.
.
Inst. vide Noti. No. LR.-107/468/54-III,
dated 4-7-1974, published in R.H.P.,
dated 3-8-1974, p. 1299.
.
Added vide Noti. No. LR.-107/468/54-III,
dated 3-8-1974, published in R.H.P., dated
17-8-1974, p. 1407.
.
Subs. for the words ‘District Industries
Officers’ vide Noti. No.
LLR-E(9)2/76, dated 24-1-1976, published in
R.H.P., dated 7-2-1976, p. 164.
.
Item No. 12 ins. vide Noti. No.
LLR-E (9) 2/76, dated 22-8-1990,
published in R. H. P., dated 8-9-1990, p.
1038-1039.
|
