M/S ANROSE PHARMA(Not Applicable) vs THE PR SERCRETARY CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX AND OTHERS(Not Applicable) Advocate - ASGI, AG,Vijay Kumar Arora — CWP/4268/2019
Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 04th May 2026.
CNR: HPHC010433212019
Filing Number
CWP/36293/2019
Filing Date
17-Dec-2019
Registration No
CWP/4268/2019
Registration Date
17-Dec-2019
Judge
Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Coram
Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Bench Type
Single
Judicial Branch
Civil Section
Decision Date
04-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Disposed Off
Last updated 02-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.M/S ANROSE PHARMA(Not Applicable)
Adv. Ajay Kumar Dhiman,Poonam,Poonam, ,Poonam
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE PR SERCRETARY CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX AND OTHERS(Not Applicable) Advocate - ASGI, AG,Vijay Kumar Arora
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
04-May-2026
Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal DuaView PDF
Case Summary: The High Court of Himachal Pradesh disposed of M/s Anrose Pharma's writ petition (CWP No. 4268/2019) on May 4, 2026, after the petitioner's counsel submitted that the petitioner had already pursued alternative statutory remedies available under law for redressing its grievances. The court accepted this submission and closed the petition along with all pending miscellaneous applications. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
27-Mar-2020
Admission After Notice
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Chander Bhusan Barowalia
-
10-Jan-2020
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan,hon'ble Mr. Justice Chander Bhusan BarowaliaView PDF
-
18-Dec-2019
Honourable The Chief Justice L. Narayana Swamy,hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal DuaView PDF
-
18-Dec-2019
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
17-Dec-2019
Case filed
Registration No. CWP/4268/2019
Case Summary: The High Court of Himachal Pradesh disposed of M/s Anrose Pharma's writ petition (CWP No. 4268/2019) on May 4, 2026, after the petitioner's counsel submitted that the petitioner had already pursued alternative statutory remedies available under law for redressing its grievances. The court accepted this submission and closed the petition along with all pending miscellaneous applications. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts