A Single Judge of the High Court of Odisha, Cuttack, delivered a short order in a WPC where the petitioner claimed lack of instruction. The application was dismissed with liberty to file a fresh one if cause of action subsists.
Application dismissed with liberty to file fresh application if cause of action subsists.
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
WPC (OAC) No.86 of 2016
Rajendra Prasad Pradhan
Petitioner
-versus-
State of Odisha & Ors.
Opp. Parties
COROM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
ORDER
Order No
28.7.2022
2. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.
2 . Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that he has received no instruction from his client.
3 . Accordingly, the WPC(OA) is dismissed. However, liberty is given to the Petitioner that he may file a fresh application, if any cause of action still subsists.
(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge
Subrat
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a WPC can be dismissed when the court finds no instruction from the client.
Rajendra Prasad Pradhan
State of Odisha
Ors.
Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
