The single judge allowed the withdrawal of the writ petition. The court clarified that time spent in these proceedings would not count towards delay in the petitioner's future challenge regarding non-service of an order.
Writ petition disposed of as withdrawn; clarified that time in these proceedings will not be treated as delay.
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.
C/SCA/18415/2021 ORDER DATED: 05/07/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 18415 of 2021
========================================================== CHETANKUMAR DINESHCHANDRA SHAH
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 2 other(s)
========================================================== Appearance:
MR MJ MEHTA(5797) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR SAURABH J MEHTA(2170) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MS MAHIMA H BRAHMBHATT(11279) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR HARDIK MEHTA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
Date : 05/07/2022 ORAL ORDER
Page 1 of 2
C/SCA/18415/2021 ORDER DATED: 05/07/2022
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
MAHESH BHATI/01
Page 2 of 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition disposed of subject to petitioner's right to challenge the impugned order.
Whether time consumed in these proceedings will be treated as delay in subsequent application.
Chetankumar Dineshchandra Shah
State of Gujarat
A.S. Supehia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
