In a civil writ petition, the petitioner's counsel submitted that the matter had become infructuous during pendency, an oral order by a Patna High Court judge dismissed the petition as withdrawn.
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.10473 of 2016
======================================================
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Parasmani, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Upadhyay, A.C. to G.P.-7
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
Mr. Sanjay Parasmani, learned Counsel for the
petitioners submit that during the pendency of the petition, the matter has become infructuous and as such, he may be permitted to withdraw the same.
2. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed as
withdrawn.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Jagdish/- U
Siya Ram Prasad Thakur and Anr
The State Of Bihar
Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur
Collection, Muzaffarpur
D.C.L.R West Muzaffarpur
Circle Officer Kudhani, Muzaffarpur
Rajiv Roy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
