The High Court dismissed the writ petition as not pressed by the advocate appearing for the petitioner, with no order as to costs.
The writ petition was dismissed as not pressed.
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.
25.06.2021
Item No.06 Court No.30 Krishnendu
WPA (H) 20 of 2021 (Through Video Conference)
In re: An application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India;
And
In re: Bishawnath Guin - Versus – The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Krishan Roy
Mr. Apurba Ghosh Mr. Pronojit Roy
For the Petitioner
Mr. Rana Mukherjee Md. Sabir Ahmed
For the State
On the prayer of Mr. Roy, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, the present writ petition, being WPA (H) 20 of 2021, is dismissed as “not pressed”.
There shall, however, be no order as to costs.
All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
(Md.Nizamuddin, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)
Bishawnath Guin
The State of West Bengal
Md. Nizamuddin
Tapabrata Chakraborty
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
