Petitioners contended the writ petition became infructuous as the underlying appeal was decided by the Chief Administrator. The Court accepted this submission and ordered accordingly.
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
C.W.P. No. 1604 of 2008
DATE OF DECISION: November 26, 2008
M/s Dharampal Khurana and Sons and others
…Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others
…Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JORA SINGH
Present: Mr. Rakesh Nehra, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Ashish Kapoor, Addl. AG, Haryana, for respondent No. 1.
Mr. Sanjeev Kaushik, Advocate, for respondent Nos. 2 and 3.
M.M. KUMAR, J.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the writ
petition has been rendered infructuous as the appeal has been decided by the Chief Administrator.
Ordered accordingly.
(M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE
(JORA SINGH)
November 26, 2008 JUDGE Pkapoor
M/s Dharampal Khurana and Sons
State of Haryana
M.M. Kumar
Jora Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
