The writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution as the petitioner's counsel was not present to espouse the case on the date of hearing, despite sending an illness slip for only one of the two listed counsel. Any interim order was 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. - 39
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 64116 of 2008
Petitioner :- Indian Farm Forestry Development Cooperative And Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru' Prin. Secy. Agricultural And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhola Nath Yadav,Vinod Kr. Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
On 20.11.2018 this Court had passed the following order :
"Learned counsel for the petitioners does not know anything about the case nor he is in possession of file. At his request, list this case in the next weekly cause list.
It is made clear that further adjournment shall not be granted as a matter of right. "
Today the case has been called out. An illness slip has been sent by Sri Bhola Nath Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners although name of another counsel Sri Vinod Kumar Yadav for the petitioners is also printed in the cause list.
We, therefore, dismiss the writ petition for want of prosecution.
Interim order, if any, is vacated.
Order Date :- 29.11.2018
nd
Indian Farm Forestry Development Cooperative
State Of U.P.
B. Amit Sthalekar
Piyush Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
