This order records that the petitioners chose not to press their petition due to changed circumstances. The court dismissed the matter as not pressed.
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 PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRL.MISC.NO. 14220-M OF 2004
DATE OF DECISION: SEPTEMBER 7, 2006
Confederation of Indian Industry and another
....PETITITIONERS
VERSUS
The State of U.T. & others
....RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL
Present: Mr. A.P.S.Shergill, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms.Meenakshi Dogra, Advocate, for respondents No.1 to 4.
Counsel for the petitioners on instructions from the petitioners states that in view of the changed circumstances, the petitioners do not want to press this petition at this stage.
Dismissed as not pressed at this stage.
September 7, 2006 (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) vkg JUDGE
Confederation of Indian Industry
The State of U.T.
Satish Kumar Mittal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
