A PIL petition was dismissed as infructuous on merits being not worked out due to subsequent events without any appearance of the petitioner.
Petition dismissed as infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Chief Justice's Court
Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 31747 of 2017
Petitioner :- Umesh Kumar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Chief Secy. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- In Person,U.K. Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Dilip B. Bhosale,Chief Justice Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
None appears for the petitioner.
Mr. Sudhanshu Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel appears for the respondent-State. He submits that in view of the subsequent events this petition has rendered infructuous. That seems to be the reason why nobody is coming forward to work it out on merits. Petition is dismissed as infructuous.
Order Date :- 2.1.2018 VMA
(Dilip B Bhosale, CJ)
(Suneet Kumar, J)
Umesh Kumar Singh
State Of U.P. Thru Chief Secy. And 2 Others
Dilip B Bhosale
Suneet Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
