A single-judge oral bench relied on a detailed order passed in a connected writ petition (Amar Singh Vs. HUDA) decided on November 29, 2006, and declined to pass any further orders in the present case.
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 & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Date of decision : December 05, 2006
Pawan Kumar Batra and others
............Petitioner
Vs.
State of Haryana and others ...........Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S BHALLA
Present: Mr. Ashok Aggarwal, Senior Advocate with Mr. J.S Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Ajay Gulati, AAG, Haryana for respondent no.1.
Mr. Arun Walia, Advocate with Mr. Ajay Nara, Advocate for respondents no. 2 & 3.
Viney Mittal, J. (Oral)
Replication filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record. A copy thereof has been supplied to the learned counsel for the respondents.
In view of the detailed orders passed in CWP No.15433 of 2006 (Amar Singh Vs. HUDA & others) decided on November 29, 2006, no further orders are required to be passed in this case.
Disposed of in the same terms.
( VINEY MITTAL ) JUDGE
December 05, 2006 ( H.S BHALLA ) ritu JUDGE
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Amar Singh Vs. HUDA & othersReferred¶13
CWP No.15433 of 2006 (Amar Singh Vs. HUDA & others)
Pawan Kumar Batra and others
State of Haryana and others
Viney Mittal
H. S. Bhalla
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
