Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 9732 (HP)

STATE OF HP AND ANR v. M/s Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd

CMP.M/370/2025 · 2025-06-17

Ajay Mohan Goel

Review Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:HHC:18450 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMP(M) No.370 of 2025 in Review Petition No. 37 of 2025 Decided on: 17.06.2025 State of Himachal Pradesh and another … Petitioners Versus M/s Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Limited … Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ____________________________________________________ For the petitioners : Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, with Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional Advocate General. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) CMP(M) No.370 of 2025 Delay condoned. Application disposed of. Review Petition No.37 of 2025 2. By way of this review petition, the petitioner is seeking the review of the judgment passed by this Court in CWP No. 6006 of 2023, titled M/s Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Limited versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another, dated 16.10.2023, which was disposed of by this Court inter alia on the basis of the judgments passed by the Hon’ble Coordinate Benches including the judgment passed in CWP No.331 of 2023, titled M/s Indorama India Private Limited versus State of Himachal Pradesh. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:18450 3. In the course of the hearing of this review petition, the Court has been informed that a review petition was also preferred by the State in the writ placing reliance whereupon the order was passed by this Court i.e. M/s Indorama India Private Limited (supra) and the review petition has been dismissed by the Hon’ble Coordinate Bench on 22.03.2025. 4. In the light of this fact, as the review petition in the case placing reliance whereupon the judgment was pronounced by this Court has been dismissed, this Court also finds no reason to review its order. More so, having heard learned Advocate General and having perused the grounds of review petition, as this Court is of the considered view that grounds taken therein do not spell out any error apparent on the face of the record but are in the mode of assailing the same on merit, therefore, this Court does not finds any reason to allow the same. Review petition is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge June 17, 2025 (vinod)