A contempt proceeding was dropped because the petitioner's counsel stated there were no instructions in the matter during a hybrid court session.
Proceedings dropped due to lack of instructions from petitioner's counsel.
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
CONTC No.105 of 2020
Banshidhar Biswal
….. Petitioner Md. G. Madani, Advocate
Vs.
Saumyasri Panigrahi, OAS, ….. Opposite Party Tahasildar (I/C) Basudevpur
Mr. L. Samantray, AGA
CORAM:
DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMAN
ORDER
22.06.2023
Order No. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
02.
2 . Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he has no
instructions in the matter.
3. In view of the above, the contempt proceeding stands
dropped.
(DR. B.R. SARANGI)
JUDGE
(M.S. RAMAN)
Aks JUDGE
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Signed by: ASWINI KUMAR SETHY Designation: PA (SECY-IN-CHARGE) Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUT TACK Date: 22-Jun-2023 17:40:10
Banshidhar Biswal
Saumyasri Panigrahi
B.R. Sarangi
M.S. Raman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
