The High Court dismissed the pending writ petition as infructuous because no representation appeared from the petitioner, noting the matter had been pending since 2013.
None. The petition was dismissed due to the petitioner's absence.
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. 46
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
OWP No. 1064/2013
IA No. 1481/2013
Kasturi Lal
…..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through: None
Vs
State of J&K and others
.…. Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Ravinder Gupta, AAG
Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL, JUDGE
ORDER
There had been no representation on behalf of the petitioner on the previous date of hearing. Today also, nobody has appeared on behalf of the petitioner in this case. Having regard to the relief claimed by the petitioner in this petition which is pending since 2013, the same appears to have become infructuous and accordingly, the present petition is dismissed.
(VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL) JUDGE
Jammu
08.03.2022 Neha
Whether the order is speaking: Yes/No Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No
Kasturi Lal
State of J&K
Vinod Chatterji Koul
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
