Rashmiranjan Choudhury v. State of Odisha
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioners sought to withdraw a 2023 writ petition as infructuous. The High Court dismissed the petition and vacated any interim order.
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.15278 of 2023
Rashmiranjan Choudhury and others
…. Petitioners
Represented By Adv. – Mr. S.S. Dash, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others
…. Opposite Parties
Represented By Adv. – Mr. K.C. Kar, Govt. Advocate
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. SAHOO
ORDER
17.02.2025
Order No.
04. 1. The writ petition has been listed under heading ‘To Be Mentioned’ at instance of petitioners. Mr. Dash, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioners and submits, memo of date has been filed. Text of the memo is reproduced below.
“ The petitioners want to withdraw the writ petition as there matter has been infructuous. Hence permitted to withdraw. Any interim order may be vacated.”
Page 1 of 2
// 2 //
2. Mr. Kar, learned advocate, Government Advocate appears on
behalf of State.
3. The writ petition is of year 2023 and order sheets bear some orders passed. Petitioners want to withdraw.
4. The writ petition is dismissed. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
(Arindam Sinha) Acting Chief Justice
(M.S. Sahoo) Judge
Sks
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Signed by: SISIR KUMAR SETHI Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 17-Feb-2025 19:19:03
Page 2 of 2
Rashmiranjan Choudhury and others
State of Odisha and others
Arindam Sinha
M.S. Sahoo
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court