P.L.Shrivastava v. State and Ors.
Chhattisgarh HCWPS/3549/2005
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
has heen made which (i by ihe XLHG—78 Emma…
A compact analysis
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.
¶1
m m w ® w o w w v g i
¶2
2 0 0
¶3
m a m W ( W u )
¶4
h a s h e e n m a d e w h i c h ( i b y i h e
¶5
X L H G — 7 8
¶6
E m m a , W m , W
¶7
m m . 9 g € . ~ z m ] . % 2 0 0
¶8
| “ W W W | m m ( w ‘ g w q |
) |
|---|---|---|
| a m a Q é y r m | m m m m p — V Q r |
m m 1 § w m é w i f c m m |
| T r i ‘ m i n a i e a i i i e r w h e r e i n i i h a s b e e n f o r g r a n t o f r e v i s e d p a y s c a i e . i i i s q h e a r i n g w a s a f f o n ‘ i e d t o t h e p e i i i i o n é a m ; s a t i s f i e d t h e a u t h o r i t y t h a t w h a t q ‘ r e c o v e r e d a s t h e r e w a s h o i i i e g - a i i t y L e a r h e a ‘ c o u n s e i f o r t h e r e s g r a n t e d b y t h i s C o u i t e a r i i e r , h o r é t ‘ H e h o w e v e r , s u b m i t s t h a t i m p u g h e t i m a é e t o t h e p e t i t i o n e r a n d w h e n i t t h e r e f o r e t h e r e i s n o t h i n g w r o n g i n t h H a v i n g c o n s i d e r e d t h e s u b m p a r t i e s , i n m y o p i n i o n , p e t i t i o n d e s v i o i a t i o n o f p r i n c i p i e s o f n a t u r a i j r e s p o n d e n t s b y n i i n g a n y r e t u r n s i n h e a r i n g t h a t a n y s h o w c a u s e n o t i a v e r n i e n t s m a d e b y t h e p e t i t i o n e r , i t r e c o v e r y w a s p a s s e d o n a v i e w / ' o p i n i i n t h a t V i e w o f t h e m a t t e r , t h e s a m e i s s e t a s i d e . i t w o u i d b e o p e h e a r t h e p e t i t i o n e r b y g i v i n g h i m p r T h e p e t i t i o n i s a i i o w e d . t h e r e s h a i i ' A - 2 ) a n d c o m p u t a t i o n s m a d e c i e a r i i ' i e u c c |
h e i c i t ‘ n a i i h e i ‘ e i 3 n o s u c h p r e — c o m ' i t i o n i i $ 0 s u b m i i i e e i t h a t p r c p e r a p p o r t u n i t y o f r . T h e p e t i i i é n e r c o u i d h a v e é x p i - a i n e d v e r w a $ p a i d t o h i m w a s h o t i i a b i e t o b e o h t i e n t s u b m i t s t h a t t h c u g h t i m e w a s n c o u l d b e h i e r i f o r w a n t o f i i i s t r u c t i o r i s . c o m m u n i c a t i e n d a t e d I V S / ’ 9 8 ( A n h e x u r e s h o w t h a t c e r t a i n e x c e s s p a y m e n t w a s s d e t e c t e d , r e c o v e i y w a s o r d e r e d a n d s a i d a c t i o n o f r e s p o n d e n t s . i o n e m a d e b y i e a r n e d c o u n s e i f o r t h e s t o ’ o e a i i o w e d o n t h e s h o r t g r o u n d o f c e . ’ i t h a s n o t b e e n d i s p u t e d b y t h e t h e d a t e w h e n p e t i t i o n w a s a d m i t t e d f o r w a s g i v e n t o t h e p e t i t i o n e r . F r o m t h e n n o t h e s a i d t h a t t h e d e c i s i o n t o m a k e n a n d t h e r e i s n o o t h e r v i e w p o s s i b i e . m p u g n e d o r d e r c a n n o t b e s u s t a i n e d , t h e f o r t h e r e s p o n d e n t r T r e a s u r y O f t i c e r t o p e r n o t i c e a n d t h e n d e c i d e t h e m a t t e r . e n o o r d e r a s t o c o s t . i g i a n t o f $ u c h r e v i $ e f i p a y s c a i e . a s e i a |
|
| S d l - ’ M a n i n d r a M o h a ‘ n S h r i v a e t a v a . r ’ r ’ n ’ r ' u u d o e E ) < | |
Parties & counsel
AI extract
- petitioner
M M
- respondent
Respondents
Coram
AI extract
Manindra Mohan Shrivastava
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Chhattisgarh HC
- Decided on
- · April
- Registered
- Case no.
- WPS/3549/2005
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court