The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner abandoned the writ petition on account of a preliminary objection raised by the respondent regarding the Petitioner. The court consequently dismissed the instant writ petition.
Writ petition dismissed on abandonment by petitioner's counsel.
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.
Court No. - 16
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20957 of 2018
Petitioner :- Gautam Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Avinash Singh Chauhan,Anoop Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
Sri Diptimaan Singh, learned counsel has entered appearance on behalf of the respondent No.2.
Sri Diptimaan Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 raises a preliminary objection that the instant writ petition is not maintainable as it is directed against a private entity. The respondent No.2 is not an instrumentality of state within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. He further submits that the U.P. State Sugar Corporation Ltd. has been purchased by a company running under the name and style of Indian Potash Ltd. The U.P. State Sugar Corporation Ltd. does not own the sugar mill at Unit Sakhoti Tanda, District-Meerut.
Faced with the aforesaid submission, Sri B.S. Chauhan holding brief of Sri Avinash Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that he does not wish to press the instant writ petition.
The writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 4.10.2018 Ashish Tripathi
Gautam Singh
State Of U.P.
3 Others
Ajay Bhanot
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
