The Himachal Pradesh High Court reaffirms that once the reliefs sought in a writ petition are granted to the petitioners during the pendency of proceedings, the petition becomes infructuous. The Court further clarifies that costs previously imposed for non-disclosure of such facts may be waived if justified. This judgment confirms prevailing principles and can be relied upon as binding authority within the jurisdiction.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | CWP/7615/2021 of Rajesh Kumar and Ors Vs State of HP and Ors |
| CNR | HPHC010328352021 |
| Date of Registration | 01-12-2021 |
| Decision Date | 15-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | Disposed Off |
| Judgment Author | Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma |
| Court | High Court of Himachal Pradesh |
| Precedent Value | Binding within jurisdiction |
| Type of Law | Constitutional Law – Writ Jurisdiction |
| Ratio Decidendi |
|
| Facts as Summarised by the Court |
|
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts in Himachal Pradesh |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Reaffirms that the grant of substantial relief during the pendency of writ proceedings renders the petition infructuous, requiring no further adjudication by the Court.
- Clarifies that costs imposed for non-disclosure of material facts may be waived where justified and upon proper application.
- Highlights the importance of timely disclosure to the Court when relief is granted by authorities after filing the writ.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court noted submissions from both petitioners and respondent State confirming that all reliefs initially sought in the writ petition had already been granted in 2022.
- Since no dispute survived, the writ proceedings had become infructuous.
- The respondent State requested waiver of costs imposed previously due to lack of timely intimation of the grant of relief; the Court found justification to waive such costs under the facts.
- As no issue remained to be decided, all pending applications were also disposed of along with the main petition.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Through learned counsel, submitted that the reliefs prayed for in the writ petition have already been granted.
- No further adjudication required in the matter.
Respondent (State of Himachal Pradesh)
- Confirmed that the reliefs prayed for were granted to petitioners in 2022.
- Requested that costs imposed due to prior non-disclosure be waived.
Factual Background
The petitioners approached the High Court seeking unspecified reliefs. During the pendency of proceedings, the authorities granted the relief sought by the petitioners in 2022. This fact was not immediately brought to the Court’s notice. Upon subsequent intimation, both parties acknowledged that no further adjudication was necessary. The State also requested a waiver of costs imposed due to the delayed disclosure.
Statutory Analysis
The judgment was rendered in the exercise of the Court’s writ jurisdiction. The decision applied the established principle that Courts will not adjudicate a writ petition when the relief sought has already been granted by the authorities, rendering the matter infructuous. The Court also exercised discretion to waive costs imposed in the course of proceedings.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – The judgment reaffirms existing law regarding the disposal of infructuous writ petitions and discretion on costs.