The High Court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous after noting the petitioner's counsel was absent and the cause of action likely no longer survived.
Petition dismissed; interim order, if any, stands 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. - 52166 of 2002
Petitioner :- Dr. Anil Kumar Agrawal Respondent :- State of U.P. and Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Indrajeet Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C,Swapnil Kumar
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.
Order Date :- 11.11.2019 KA
Dr. Anil Kumar Agrawal
State of U.P.
Sudhir Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
