The petitioner sought revival of a writ petition challenging non-declaration of results. The court disposed of the application as infructuous after learning that the petitioner's result had been declared on 10.02.2018.
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.
$~36
versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Vivek Goyal, CGSC with Mr.Harsh Pandit & Mr.Rajeev Ranjan Shahi, Advs. for UOI. Mr.Waize Ali Noor & Mr.Kirtiman Singh, Advs. for NBE.
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI
O R D E R % 12.02.2018
C.M. No.5365/2018
The present application has been filed by the petitioner seeking revival of the writ petition on the ground that the respondents have not declared the result of the petitioner and the same had been placed in the category of ‘withheld’.
Today, learned counsel for the parties submit that the result of the petitioner has now been declared vide order dated 10.02.2018 and in view of this, the application has become infructuous.
The present application is disposed of as infructuous.
REKHA PALLI, J
FEBRUARY 12, 2018
gm
Aditi Suri
Union of India
Rekha Palli
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
