Petitioners challenge the maintainability of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, which has been declared as infructuous and disposed of at the hearing without consideration of merits.
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
CWP No.14284 of 2006
DATE OF DECISION: October 01, 2012
Supervisors Union, Punjab Urban Planning & Development Authority
(PUDA) and others …..Petitioners
versus
State of Punjab and others
.....Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI, CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, JUDGE
Present: Mr.H.C. Arora, Advocate for the petitioners
A.K. SIKRI, C.J. : (Oral)
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this
petition has become infructuous.
Disposed of as infructuous.
( A.K. SIKRI ) CHIEF JUSTICE
October 01, 2012 (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) pc JUDGE
Supervisors Union, Punjab Urban Planning & Development Authority and others
State of Punjab and others
A.K. Sikri
Rakesh Kumar Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
