The writ petition filed by Vinod Kumar against the State of U.P. was dismissed because the petitioner's counsel did not press the case during the hearing.
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. - 35
Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 215 of 2019
Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shyam Sunder,Prakash Chandra Pathak Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Bharati Sapru,J. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
Heard Shri Shyam Sunder, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Vinod Kant, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Shri B.P. Singh Kachhawah, learned Standing Counsel for the State.
Learned counsel for the petitioner does not wish to press this petition.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed as not pressed.
Order Date :- 26.2.2019 pks
Vinod Kumar
State Of U.P.
2 Others
Bharati Sapru
Piyush Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
