A special writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution due to the absence of representation and the petitioner opting for none. The court did not engage with the merits of the case.
Writ petition and connected IA dismissed for want of prosecution.
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.
Sr. No. 98
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
SWP No. 2417/2010 IA No. 3409/2010
Kelash Singh
.....Appellant/Petitioner(s)
Through :- None
v/s
State of J&K and ors.
.....Respondent(s)
Through :- Mr. Suneel Malhotra, GA
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE
ORDER
There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. The writ
petition is dismissed for want of prosecution along with connected IA.
(Rajnesh Oswal)
Judge
JAMMU
15.11.2021
Karam Chand/Secy
Whether the order is speaking: Yes/No
Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No
Kelash Singh
State of J&K and ors.
Rajnish Oswal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
