The court disposed of the writ petition on the same terms as in a previous judgment (W.P. No. 6004 of 2016) without recording further reasoning, noting that the controversy was already adjudicated.
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. - 7491 of 2018
Petitioner :- Amir Ahmad Khan And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Dwivedi,Balram Jee Verma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Manu Singh,Pradeep Kumar Upadhyay
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel. Shri Manu Singh appears for second and third respondent and Shri Pradeep Kumar Upadhyay appears for fourth respondent.
Learned counsel for the parties are in agreement that the controversy raised in this petition has already been adjudicated by this Court vide judgment dated 30th January, 2018 in a bunch of writ petition with leading Writ Petition No.6004 of 2016 (Sartaj Ahmad & Ors. v. State of U.P. & Ors.) and the present petition is also liable to be decided on the same terms.
For the reasoned recorded in Sartaj Ahmad & Ors. (Supra), this writ petition is also disposed of on the same terms.
Order Date :- 9.3.2018 SP/
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sartaj Ahmad & Ors. v. State of U.P. & Ors.Followed¶6
Sartaj Ahmad & Ors. v. State of U.P. & Ors., Writ Petition No.6004 of 2016
Amir Ahmad Khan And 2 Others
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
