The High Court dismissed a writ petition after the petitioner's counsel was absent. The court held that the cause of action had likely ceased to survive, the matter had become infructuous, and the petitioner had lost interest. Any interim order stands vacated.
Writ petition dismissed; interim order, if any, 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. - 17332 of 2005
Petitioner :- Sudama Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Principal Secy Electricity And Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Radhey Shyam Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,R.D. Khare
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.
Order Date :- 28.1.2020 Manish Himwan
Sudama Yadav
State of U.P.
Sudhir Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
