The petition was disposed of by referring the petitioners to a previous order in a connected matter. No substantive legal proposition or reasoning is elaborated in this order.
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. - 3
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 39489 of 2016
Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Sharma Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Pranab Kumar Ganguli Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Amrendra Nath Singh
Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J. Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
The writ petition is allowed.
For order, see our order of date passed on Writ-A No.- 37212 of 2016 (Partho Protim Lahiry Vs. State of U.P. and 4 others) .
Order Date :- 10.5.2018 S.Sharma
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Partho Protim Lahiry Vs. State of U.P.Followed¶6
Writ-A No.- 37212 of 2016 (Partho Protim Lahiry Vs. State of U.P. and 4 others)
Ashok Kumar Sharma
State Of U.P.
Pankaj Mithal,J.
Saral Srivastava,J.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
