The High Court dismissed the writ petition in default for non-prosecution due to the petitioners' failure to appear for several hearings after their counsel was discharged.
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.
$~24
VIKAS SAINI THROUGH SH ROSHAN LAL SAINI LEGAL GUARDIAN FATHER & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: None.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Himanshu Pathak, SPC for R-1.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA O R D E R
% 18.11.2024
SANJEEV NARULA, J
NOVEMBER 18, 2024 d.negi
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/11/2024 at 13:07:07
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioners have lost interest in the matter by failing to appear for several hearings?
VIKAS SAINI THROUGH SH ROSHAN LAL SAINI LEGAL GUARDIAN FATHER & ORS.
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Sanjeev Narula
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
