The High Court dismissed a writ petition for non-prosecution as neither the petitioner nor its counsel appeared despite two prior hearing dates.
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.224 of 1993
Date of Decision:-15.11.2011
The Municipal Corporation of Amritsar ...Petitioner
Versus
The Presiding Officer, Labour Court & Anr. ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR
Present:Nemo for the petitioner.
Mr.Avinash Jain, Advocate for respondent No.2.
Mehinder Singh Sullar, J . (Oral)
This writ petition was filed in this Court on 2.1.1993 and was admitted on 6.1.1993. The perusal of the record would reveal that none had appeared on behalf of the petitioner on 4.11.2011, when this petition was listed for hearing for today. Today, again no one is present on its behalf, despite the case having been called twice.
From the sequence of events indicated here-in-above, it appears that neither the petitioner nor its counsel is interested in pursuing the case. Therefore, no option is left with this Court, except to dismiss the writ petition for nonprosecution.
Accordingly, the instant writ petition is dismissed for non-
prosecution.
15.11.2011 AS
(Mehinder Singh Sullar) Judge
The Municipal Corporation of Amritsar
The Presiding Officer, Labour Court
Mehinder Singh Sullar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
