The High Court dismissed Writ Petition 10766 of 2021 on non-prosecution by the learned advocate representing the petitioner who submitted a letter indicating lack of interest in proceeding with the matter.
Writ petition dismissed; interim order, if any, vacated.
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.
W.P.A. 10766 of 2021
(Through Video Conference)
Dr. Partha Sarathi Nath -vs-
The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Bikram Banerjee Mr. Arka Nandi … for the petitioner Mr. Sirsanya Bandopadhyay Mr. Arka Kumar Nag … for the State
Ms. Lina Majumder Mr. Arijit Dey … for the respondent nos. 4-6.
The writ petition has come up in the list under the heading “To be mentioned” for non-prosecution at the instance of the learned advocate representing the writ petitioner.
Mr. Bikram Banerjee, learned advocate, appears on behalf of the writ petitioner and submits that the writ petitioner does not want to proceed with the matter and in support of the same he has filed one letter dated 25th February, 2022 which he has received from the petitioner. Such letter dated 25th February, 2022 is taken on record.
Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya, respondent nos. 4 to 6, is represented by Mr. Arijit Dey, learned advocate and State respondents are represented by Mr. Sirsanya Bandopadhyay, learned Junior Standing Counsel.
2
Considering the submission made on behalf of the writ petitioner the writ petition stands dismissed on the ground of non-prosecution. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Urgent Photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties, upon usual undertakings.
(Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)
Dr. Partha Sarathi Nath
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya
Saugata Bhattacharyya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
