The High Court dismissed the writ petition under Art. 226, as no counsel appeared for the petitioner, the cause of action seemed to have ceased, or the matter had become infructuous.
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. - 35165 of 2002
Petitioner :- Shri Brahma Nand Arya Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :-
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.
Brahma Nand Arya
State Of U.P.
Sudhir Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
