The High Court held that a writ petition was infructuous due to the filing of an affidavit of compliance by the respondent's counsel, exempting the personal appearance of the Consolidation Officer.
Writ petition 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.
Court No. - 51
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 2850 of 2022
Petitioner :- Parvati Devi Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ganesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Santosh Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no.3 and learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State-respondents.
Affidavit of compliance has been filed by learned Standing Counsel, which is taken on record.
Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent no.3 have not disputed to the same.
Personal appearance of Sri Sharad Chandra Yadav, Consolidation Officer, Bhanpur, is exempted.
In view of the above, this writ petitioner is dismissed as infructuous.
Order Date :- 24.11.2022 Ruchi Agrahari
Digitally signed by RUCHI AGRAHARI Date: 2022.11.24 15:38:32 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Parvati Devi
State Of U P
2 Others
Siddharth
Ruchi Agrahari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
