Dismissed
United Metal v. Union of India
Orissa HCWP(C)/6066/2010
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
No. 6066 of 2010 03. 08.03.2017 No one is…
What the court decided
AI extract
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.
W.P.(C) No. 6066 of 2010
03. 08.03.2017 No one is present on behalf of the petitioner even on revised
call.
Having heard Mr. Amitav Das, learned counsel appearing for opposite party no.3
and on perusal of record, we are of the opinion that in the facts of the case, prayer made in
this case does not deserve to be granted in the writ jurisdiction.
The petition is accordingly dismissed.
....... ( VINEET SARAN )
CHIEF JUSTICE
..
( DR. B.R.SARANGI )
JUDGE
-2-
Petitioner
Opposite party. no.3
VINEET SARAN
DR. B.R.SARANGI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court