Petitioner sought provident fund dues. Respondent submitted an apology and affirmed dues were settled. Court accepted apology and disposed of the writ petition.
None; petition disposed of after acceptance of apology and confirmation of payment.
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.
$~2
BHARAT BHUSHAN ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. P.R. Chopra, Advocate.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Keshav Mohan & Mr. Piyush Choudhary, Advs. for R2 & R3. Mr. Ajant Kumar, Advocate for R4.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL O R D E R % 05.01.2018
VINOD GOEL, J.
JANUARY 05, 2018 “sandeep”
Bharat Bhushan
Union of India
Vinod Goel
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
