The Writ Petition was disposed of as it stands because the appeal counsel had no instructions, leading to the inaction of the matter without further orders.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.C(OA) No. 2221 of 2013
Nabaghana Sahoo
…. Petitioner
Mr. D. Samal, Advocate -versus…. State of Odisha & Others Opposite Parties
Mr. S.N. Pattnaik,AGA
CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH
ORDER
07.09.2022
Order No.
02. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2 . Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he has no
instruction in this matter.
3. In view of the above submission, this Writ Petition stands
disposed of as such.
(V. NARASINGH)
Judge
Ayesha
Page 1 of 1
Nabaghana Sahoo
State of Odisha & Others
V. Narasimha
Ayesha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
