Counsel for appellants requested permission to intervene in Municipal compounding proceedings, arguing vested interest. The court denied this request citing prior orders denying similar intervention petitions in related writ appeals.
None granted; intervention request refused.
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.
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WA No. 490 of 2016
---- Appellants
Versus
---- Respondents
For Appellants : Shri RS Marhas, Advocate For respective Respondents : Shri JK Gilda, Advocate General with
wa 490 of 2016
2
Shri Gary Mukhopadhyay, Government Advocate, Shri Prateek Sharma and Ms Pushpa Dwivedi, Advocates
Hon'ble Shri Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu
Judgment on Board
Per Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Chief Justice 25.09.2018
wa 490 of 2016
3
Appeals, specially Writ Appeal No.497 of 2016 and other analogous decisions.
Sd/- Sd/- (Ajay Kumar Tripathi) (Parth Prateem Sahu) Chief Justice Judge
padma
Sanjay Khandelwal
Dinesh Verma
State Of Chhattisgarh
The Director, Town And Country Planning Chhattisgarh
Municipal Corporation Bilaspur
Bilaspur Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.
Ajay Kumar Tripathi
Parth Prateem Sahu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
