The writ petitioner/appellant was permitted to withdraw the matter. No substantive legal proposition was articulated.
The MATA is allowed to be withdrawn.
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.
MATA No.46 of 2018
This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode. Mr. R. Achary, learned counsel for the appellant files a memo to the effect that the appellant wants to withdraw the MATA.
Hence, the MATA is allowed to be withdrawn.
……………………….. S. K. Mishra, J.
….……………………….
Savitri Ratho, J.
TUDU
S. K. Mishra
Savitri Ratho
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
