In a civil writ jurisdiction case, the Patna High Court dismissed the petitioner's writ petition on the grounds of non-prosecution and absence of the petitioner on the day of hearing.
Writ petition dismissed for non-prosecution.
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 JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12042 of 2007
======================================================
Samir Kumar
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The Union of India & Ors
.... .... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha 3
Mr. Arun Kumar
Mr. Nawal Kishor Prasad
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Kumar Pandey
======================================================
CORAM: HON`BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI
ORAL ORDER
3 05-10-2012 None for the petitioner. Counsel for the Union of India is
present.
Writ is dismissed for non-prosecution.
(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J)
R.K.Pathak/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition should be allowed given the petitioner's absence?
Samir Kumar
The Union of India
Ajay Kumar Tripathi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
