Court directed the trial court to decide an outstanding stay application filed in a revision petition within two months without adjudicating the merits of the underlying writ petition.
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. - 7
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 3542 of 2021
Petitioner :- Smt. Ramlalli Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pradeep Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J.
The sole grievance of the petitioner is that the Stay Application which was filed on 23.9.2020 in Revision No. 1487 of 2016 (Computer Case No. C20160500001487) was not being decided and, therefore, a prayer for a direction has been made that the application be decided expeditiously within a stipulated period of time.
Under such circumstances, without going into the merits of the case, it is being directed that the Stay Application dated 23.9.2020 filed in Revision No. 1487 of 2016 (Computer Case No. C20160500001487) be decided within a period of two months from the date of presentation of a copy of this order. The copy of this order would be duly certified by the petitioner's counsel.
With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 17.2.2021 PK
Ramlalli
State Of U P
Siddhartha Varma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
