A PIL petition was dismissed as infructuous because the relief sought had already been rendered ineffective. The court did not engage in substantive legal reasoning.
The petition was dismissed as infructuous.
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.
Chief Justice's Court Serial No.8
**HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD *****
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 92 of 2022
Vimal Kumar
.....Petitioner
Through :- Mr. Harsh Vardhan Gupta, Advocate
v/s
Central Board of Direct Taxes and another .....Respondents
Through :- Mr. Gaurav Mahajan, Advocate for respondent No.1
CORAM : HON'BLE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, JUDGE
ORDER
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the prayer made in the present petition has been rendered infructuous.
The petition is, accordingly, dismissed as infructuous.
(Prakash Padia, J.) (Rajesh Bindal, C.J.)
Allahabad 03.02.2022 Kuldeep/Rakesh
Vimal Kumar
Central Board of Direct Taxes
another
Rajesh Bindal
Prakash Padia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
