In WPA/8137/2005, Bibek Chaudhuri, J. dismissed a writ petition challenging a penalty imposition as infructuous based on the petitioner's submission that passage of time rendered the petition futile. No order as to costs was passed.
Writ petition dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs.
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.
16.08.2021 Sl. No.14 Mithun Ct.No.-09
WPA/8137/2005 (Via Video Conference) Surender Singh Dalal Vs. Union of India & Ors.
Mr. K.B.S.Mahapatra, Adv.
… for the petitioner.
Mr.Anirban Mitra, Adv
…for the Union of India.
The instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner, an Inspector of Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) challenging imposition of penalty violating the principle of natural justice and denying the reasonable opportunity to him of being heard. An affidavit-inopposition has been filed by the learned Advocate for the respondent Nos.1 to 6 on behalf of them.
It is frankly submitted by the learned Advocate for the petitioner that due to passage of time, the instant writ petition has been become infructuous and no order is required to be passed in the instant writ petition.
2
In view of such submission made by the learned Advocate for the petitioner, the instant petition be dismissed as infructuous.
There shall be no order as to costs.
(Bibek Chaudhuri, J)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to dismiss the writ petition for being infructuous due to passage of time.
Surender Singh Dalal
Union of India
Bibek Chaudhuri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
