The High Court held that since the interim relief was already granted and two years had passed without purpose, the petition which sought protection was partly allowed even though the petitioner's counsel was absent.
The petition was partly allowed; no order as to costs.
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. - 2
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 851 of 2016
Petitioner :- Smt. Mithlesh & Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. & 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Gopal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.
Order Date :- 19.9.2018
Mukesh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition seeking protection should be allowed when the petitioner's counsel is absent and the interim order has reportedly outlived its utility.
Smt. Mithlesh & Another
State Of U.P.
4 Others
Kaushal Jayendra Thaker
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
