The High Court of Chhattisgarh, single judge bench, allowed the writ petition solely on the reliance placed on a Supreme Court judgment, setting aside multiple subject demands notified by the respondents.
The subject demands vide notices Annexure-P/3 to Annexure-P/12 were set aside.
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
WP No. 474 of 1998
---- Petitioner
Versus
---- Respondent
For Petitioner : Dr. Saurabh Kumar Pande, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri Shashank Thakur, Govt. Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra
Order On Board
03/12/2018 :
Sd/-
Judge (Prashant Kumar Mishra)
Barve
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
District Mining Officer and Others Vs. Tata Iron and Steel Co.Referred¶1
(2001) 7 SCC 358 · Who else cites this
Steel Authority Of India Ltd
The Union Of India
The State of Madhya Pradesh
The Collector
The Mining Officer
Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
