Nimuel v. Sub-Collector
Case brief
What is this about?
WHEREAS
What the court decided
OJC No. 7765 of 1998
- 05.08.2019 None appears for the petitioners at the time of call.
Heard Mr. A.K. Mishra, learned Addl. Government Advocate and Mr. B. Panigrahi, learned counsel for opposite party no.2.
Perused the record. The petitioners have filed this application seeking to quash the entire process of allotment of shop rooms and the process of lottery held on 05.06.1998 and further seek for a direction to allot the shop room in their favour.
Mr. A.K. Mishra, learned Addl. Government Advocate states that following due procedure, the selection has been done. Therefore, the claim made by the petitioners cannot sustain in the eye of law. To which, Mr. B. Panigrahi, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 has no objection.
In such view of the matter, the writ petition merits no consideration and thereby the same is hereby dismissed.
…………….…………… (DR. B.R. SARANGI)
JUDGE
Ashok
Parties & counsel
- respondent
Opposite party no. 2
Coram
DR. B.R. SARANGI
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court