The High Court dismissed the writ petition as not pressed based on the petitioners' instruction to their counsel, thereby also dismissing connected applications.
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.
01 02.02.22
Ct. No. 04
Akd
COST 2 of 2012 With
CAN 3 of 2017 (Old No. CAN 11241 of 2017) CAN 4 of 2018 (Old No. CAN 1323 of 2018)
The Higher and State Audit Accounts Services Association, West Bengal & Ors. Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Amitava Mukherjee, Ms. Ankita Ghosh, Ms. Arpita Saha. … for the petitioniers. Mr. Tapan Kumar Mukherjee. … for the State. Mr. Mayukh Maitra.
… for the respondents.
Learned Advocate on record of the petitioners submits, on instruction, that his clients do not intend to proceed with instant writ petition. Though the written instruction has not been filed but he has shouldered the responsibility of such statement, as according to him, the same has been communicated by his clients.
In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed as not pressed. Consequently the connected applications are also dismissed.
(Harish Tandon, J.)
(Rabindranath Samanta, J.)
2
The Higher and State Audit Accounts Services Association, West Bengal & Ors.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Harish Tandon
Rabindranath Samanta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
