Based on absence of petitioner counsel and lack of interest in the matter, the High Court treated the writ petition as infructuous and dismissed it, vacating any interim order.
The writ petition was dismissed and any interim order stood 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. - 34
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14868 of 2005
Petitioner :- Kashi Nath And Others Respondent :- State of U.P. and Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prabhakar Sinha Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.
Order Date :- 9.12.2019 KA
Kashi Nath And Others
State of U.P. and Others
Sudhir Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
