Anantaram Dash v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
This single-paragraph judgment dismisses the writ petition on the ground that the petitioners had already retired by voluntary retirement (VRS) during the petition's pendency, rendering it not maintainable.
What the court decided
O.J.C. No.9070 of 1999
- 4.11.2020
- This matter is taken up
- through Video Conferencing.
Nobody joins on behalf of the petitioners through Video Conferencing. However, Mr. Mishra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party no.2 through Video Conferencing submits that during pendency of the Writ Petition petitioners have already taken VRS and therefore, the present Writ Petition is not maintainable.
Recording the statement made by Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 that the petitioners have already taken VRS in the meantime, this Court finds, petitioners are not entitled to claim otherwise. Hence the Writ Petition stands dismissed.
.…..….………………… (Biswanath Rath, J.)
Ayas
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition remained maintainable when petitioners retired during its pendency.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Petitioners
- respondent
Opposite party no.2
Coram
Biswanath Rath
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court