A writ petition filed by Kailash Tamoli was dismissed in default because no one appeared from the petitioner side on the date of hearing or the previous date. The judgment contains no substantive legal reasoning.
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.
30 22.03.2022
gd/ssd
WPA(P) 199 OF 2021 KAILASH TAMOLI VS
THE HIGH COURT ADMINISTRATION AND ANR.
Mr. Siddhartha Banerjee, Mr. Sudipta Nayan Ghosh ..for the High Court Administration.
Mr. Anindya Lahiri, Mr. Samrat Dey Pal ..for the Respondent No.2.
None present for the petitioner nor any accommodation has been prayed for. On the previous date also no one was present for the petitioner.
Since no one has come forward to prosecute this petition, therefore, the petition is dismissed in default.
(Prakash Shrivastava, C.J.)
(Rajarshi Bharadwaj, J.)
2
e
Kailash Tamoli
The High Court Administration
Prakash Shrivastava
Rajarshi Bharadwaj
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
