Munna v. State of Up and 3 Others
Case brief
What is this about?
The court noted submissions that the writ petition was barred by delay. The petitioner sought time to explain the delay via a supplementary affidavit. The petition was listed for further consideration.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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. - 32
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 9042 of 2024
Petitioner :- Munna Respondent :- State Of Up And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Satyvrat Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- Achal Singh,C.S.C.
Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
Counsel for the State-respondents, as well as counsel for the respondent-Gaon Sabha have pointed out that the writ petition is barred by delay/laches.
Sri Satyvrat Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks time to file a supplementary affidavit explaining the delay/laches in filing the writ petition.
As prayed, list on 12.8.2024 as fresh.
Order Date :- 22.7.2024 Faridul
[Dr. Y.K. Srivastava, J.]
Digitally signed by :- FAREEDUL HASAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Munna
- respondent
State Of Up And 3 Others
Coram
Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · July
- Registered
- Case no.
- WRIC/9042/2024
All orders in this case
4 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court