Petitioner argued the case is covered by a contemporaneous order on the same facts, which was partly allowed.
Writ petition partly allowed in terms of the concurrent order in WRIT A No. 5308 of 2018.
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. - 18
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 4963 of 2018
Petitioner :- Vimlesh Respondent :- State Of Up And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Alok Kumar Yadav,Jigyasa Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Learned counsel appearing for the parties state that the controversy involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the order rendered today in WRIT - A No. - 5308 of 2018 (Punam Singh Vs. State Of U.P.).
The writ petition is also partly allowed in terms of the judgment rendered today in WRIT - A No. - 5308 of 2018 (Punam Singh Vs. State Of U.P.).
Order Date :- 28.3.2018 shiv
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Punam Singh Vs. State Of U.P.Referred¶5
WRIT - A No. - 5308 of 2018 (Punam Singh Vs. State Of U.P.)
Vimlesh
State Of Up
Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
Parties & counsel
