Brundaban Behera v. Sub-Collector, Chatrapur and Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
Writ petition disposed of due to lack of instructions from counsel for the petitioner, who did not appear to render any.
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) No.8927 of 2017
Brundaban Behera & …. Petitioners others
Mr. A.P. Ray, Advocate
-versus-
Sub-Collector, Chatrapur & …. Opposite Parties others
Order No.
13.
Mr. A. Behera, Additional Standing Counsel Mr. M.R. Dash, Advocate (For Opposite Party No.4)
CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
ORDER
13.12.2023
This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Pursuant to order dated 11.12.2023, Mr. A.P. Ray, learned Counsel for the Petitioner is present and renders no instruction. He files a memo to the said effect.
3. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of due to want to instruction.
Prasant
(S. K. Mishra) Judge
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Signed by: PRASANT KUMAR PRADHAN Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 14-Dec-2023 11:43:48
Brundaban Behera
Sub-Collector, Chatrapur
Sanjay Kumar Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court