The High Court dismissed a writ petition where petitioners were absent for a revised call, deeming the matter infructuous. No substantive legal issues were addressed.
Writ petition dismissed; interim order vacated.
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. - 38
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 42968 of 2008
Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Pal And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- K.K. Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Abhinava Upadhya,J. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
List has been revised. None is present for the petitioners to press this writ petition even in the revised call.
It appears that the petitioners have lost interest in the case. That apart the writ petition appears to have become infructuous.
It is, accordingly, dismissed. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Order Date :- 23.8.2018 Sunil Kr. Gupta
(Rajiv Gupta, J.) (Abhinava Upadhya, J.)
Manoj Kumar Pal
Others
State Of U.P.
Abhinava Upadhya
Rajiv Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
