Dismissed
Prasanta Ku Rout v. State
Orissa HCWP(C)/7806/2006
Case brief
AI extract
What is this about?
This court dismissed the writ petition, holding that disputed questions of fact were involved, making it inappropriate for writ jurisdiction. The petition was disposed without merits on merit.
What did the court decide?
None granted; petition disposed without merits on merit; liberty given to approach alternative forum.
What the court decided
AI extract
¶1
W.P.(C) No. 7806 of 2006
¶2
10. 09.03.2017 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
¶3
By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for refund of Rs. 1,
68,666/- deposited by the petitioner for operating sand sairat.
Admittedly, disputed questions of fact are involved which cannot be gone into
in writ jurisdiction. As such, we would not be inclined to entertain this writ petition on mer
it.
¶4
Accordingly, we dispose of this writ petition with liberty to the petitioner t
o approach such other alternative forum available to him in law for redressal of his grievance
s.
¶5
....... ( VINEET SARAN )
CHIEF JUSTICE
¶6
( DR. B.R.SARANGI )
¶7
JUDGE
¶8
-2-
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
AI extract
Whether a writ jurisdiction is maintainable to determine disputed questions of fact regarding refund of deposited amount.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to refund of deposit for sand sairat in writ proceedings.
Parties & counsel
AI extract
- petitioner
Petitioner
- respondent
Respondent
Coram
AI extract
VINEET SARAN
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court