Petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 227. No one appeared to press the petition. The High Court dismissed the petition for want of prosecution and vacated any interim orders.
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 :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2090 of 2010 Petitioner :- Smt.Sanyukta Bhatia U/A-227 Respondent :- The State Consumer Redressal Commission And Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Rao Narendra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Manoj Kumar Srivastava
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
List revised.
None appears on behalf of the petitioner to press the petition. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Order Date :- 10.12.2024 J. K. Dinkar
Digitally signed by :- JESHU KUMAR DINKAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Smt. Sanyukta Bhatia
The State Consumer Redressal Commission And Ors.
Pankaj Bhatia
Jeshu Kumar Dinkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
