The writ petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, was dismissed as not pressed. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that they had no instructions to proceed with the petition. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the matter without adjudicating any substantive legal issue.
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.10943 of 1997
======================================================
Versus
.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sourendra Pandey, Advocate For the Respondent/s : None
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER --------------
9 17-07-2015 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that he does not have any instruction to press the present petition.
In view of the aforesaid submission, the writ petition stands dismissed as not pressed.
(Birendra Prasad Verma, J)
Tahir/-
U
Pyrites, Phosphates & Chemicals Ltd. through S.P. Singh
Executive Director, Pyrites, Phosphates & Chemicals Ltd.
Sri R. Pathak
The State of Bihar
Deputy Labour Commissioner-cum-Appellate Authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, Gaya
Assistant Labour Commissioner-cum-Appellate Authority under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, P.O. Dalmianagar
Birendra Prasad Verma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
