In a writ petition, the respondent submitted that the petitioner had filed alternative proceedings under the U.P. Revenue Code. The petitioner's counsel withdrew the petition. The writ petition was dismissed.
The writ petition was dismissed.
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. - 18
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11738 of 2021
Petitioner :- Akhilesh Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- B.B.Rai,Ajitabh Choubey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shriprakash Shrivastava
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
Instructions provided by learned Standing Counsel are taken in the record.
Learned Standing Counsel on the basis of instructions submits that the petitioner has already taken out proceedings under the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 registered as Case No. 288 of 2020 under Section 9-A of the Consolidation of Holdings Act this fact has not been disclosed by the petitioner int he writ petition.
Faced with this learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner does not wish to press this writ petition.
The writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 7.9.2021 Nadeem
Akhilesh Yadav
State Of U.P.
Ajay Bhanot
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
