The petitioner in a writ petition did not appear despite repeated notices and a previous indulgence granted for pressing the case. The High Court dismissed the petition for non-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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No.553 of 2020
Ram Nath Mahto .......... Petitioner.
-Versus-
.......... Respondents.
----- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----For the Petitioner : None For the Respondents: Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate -----
Order No.07 Date: 22.03.2023
No one appears on behalf of the petitioner despite repeated
calls.
Earlier also on 4th January, 2023, no one appeared on behalf of the petitioner and the case was adjourned by way of an indulgence to the counsel for the petitioner to press the present writ petition.
Since no one has been appearing on behalf of the petitioner to press the present writ petition, the same is dismissed for nonprosecution.
(Rajesh Shankar, J.)
Sanjay/
Ram Nath Mahto
M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited
The Director (Personnel Manager), M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited
The General Manager, M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited
The Project Officer, M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited
Rajesh Shankar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
