madina glass works Vs union of india and 4 others

Chief Justice's Court

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 3496 of 2018

Petitioner :- Madina Glass Works Respondent :- Union Of India And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mr Rakesh Kumar Garg Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Mr Madhur Prakash

¶4

Hon'ble Dilip B. Bhosale,Chief Justice Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Rakesh Kumar Garg, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Madhur Prakash, learned counsel for respondents 2, 3 and 4.

¶6

Counsel for the petitioner does not press the writ petition and seeks liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned authority for seeking new industrial gas connection in the prescribed format, if any, within a period of two weeks from today and seeks direction to the concerned authority to consider and decide his application within time frame.

¶7

The petition is disposed of as not pressed. It is open to the petitioner make an application, as aforementioned, within a period of two weeks from today and if such an application is made, the concerned authority shall consider and deal with the same strictly in accordance with law expeditiously. It is made clear that this Court has not examined whether the petitioner is entitled for such connection.

¶8

Order Date :- 30.1.2018 RK

¶9

(Suneet Kumar, J) (Dilip B Bhosale, CJ)

madina glass works v. union of india and 4 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

madina glass works v. union of india and 4 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kishori Lal Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rajiv Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

M/S S.S.D. and Co. a Partnership Firm and 2 Others Vs Ghaziabad Development Authority Thru Addl. Secy.

Qadeer Qadar Khan and 5 Othters Vs State of U.P. and 4 Ohters

farzoo @ farzand Vs State of U.P.

ghan shyam singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 others