The High Court found the writ petition infructuous as no appearance was made on behalf of the petitioners to press it. Accordingly, the petition was dismissed as infructuous, and any interim order was discharged.
Writ petition dismissed as infructuous; interim order, if any, discharged.
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. - 1
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11219 of 2010
Petitioner :- M/S. Lohia Brass Pvt. Ltd. And Anr. Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Director Of Industries Udyog Nid. And Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Raj Kumar Khanna Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
List revised.
No one has appeared on behalf of the petitioners to press this petition, meaning thereby, that petitioner is no longer interested to press it and that it has been rendered infructuous.
Sri Rahul Malviya, learned Standing Counsel is present on behalf of the State.
In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous .
Interim order, if any, stands discharged.
Order Date :- 10.12.2019 IrfanUddin
(Ajit Kumar,J.) (Ramesh Sinha,J.)
M/S. Lohia Brass Pvt. Ltd. And Anr.
State Of U.P. Thru. Director Of Industries Udyog Nid. And Ors.
Ramesh Sinha
Ajit Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
