The High Court disposed of a writ petition by directing the second respondent to consider the petitioner's application dated 17.11.2017 within three months after giving parties an opportunity.
The second respondent was directed to consider the petitioner's application dated 17.11.2017 and pass an appropriate order within three months.
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 - C No. - 14385 of 2018
Petitioner :- Lal Bahadur Patel Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 8 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Jaya Nath Patel Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.
In view of the order proposed to be passed, notices need not go to private respondents.
After arguing the matter for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner has confined his prayer for a direction to second respondent to consider and decide the application of the petitioner dated 17.11.2017 (Annexure No.5 to the writ petition) within stipulated period.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue and with the consent, the writ petition stands disposed of asking the second respondent to look into the grievance of the petitioner and pass appropriate order in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order but certainly after giving opportunity to the parties concerned.
Order Date :- 20.4.2018 SP/
Lal Bahadur Patel
State Of U.P.
Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
