Two writ petitions filed by Government servants were dismissed as infructuous because they arose out of proceedings that were closed, leaving no live controversy.
Petitions dismissed as rendered infructuous by efflux of time and closure of underlying proceedings.
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
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
W.P.(S) No. 4138 of 2012
---- Petitioner
Versus
---- Respondents
And
W.P.(S) No. 3752 of 2013
---- Petitioner
Versus
---- Respondents
| For Petitioners | : | Mr. Prashant Dansena, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Advocate |
|---|---|---|
| For State | : | Ms. Nupoor Sonkar, Panel Lawyer |
| For Private Respondent | : | Mr. Akash Pandey, Advocate |
2
Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board
02.07.2024
Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge
vatti
Onkar Prasad Verma
Lalit Pandey
State of Chhattisgarh
State of Madhya Pradesh
Premnarayan Gupta
Transport Commissioner
Rakesh Mohan Pandey
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
