Order dismissing a writ petition under Article 226 for want of prosecution due to inability to contact the petitioner. No substantive legal principles are laid down.
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.
$~44
PANKAJ MITTAL AND ANR. .....Petitioner
versus
TATA POWER DELHI DISTRIBUTION LTD. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Manish Srivastava, Mr. Moksh Arora, Mr. Santosh Ramadurg. Advs.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
O R D E R % 14.08.2024
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J
AUGUST 14, 2024/KG
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 17/08/2024 at 14:27:20
PANKAJ MITTAL AND ANR.
TATA POWER DELHI DISTRIBUTION LTD.
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
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
