Court dismissed the writ petition for want of prosecution as the petitioner failed to appear on two consecutive 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
CRR-991-2004 (O&M)
Date of Decision: November 19, 2012
Joginder Singh
…Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another
…Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI
Present: None for the petitioner.
Mr. Shekhar Mudgal, AAG, Haryana, for respondent No. 1.
NARESH KUMAR SANGHI, J.
The case has been called twice, but no one is present for the petitioner. Even on 26.9.2012 and 10.7.2012, no one had put in appearance for the petitioner. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing the present petition.
Dismissed for want of prosecution.
(NARESH KUMAR SANGHI) November 19, 2012 JUDGE Pkapoor
Joginder Singh
State of Haryana
NARESH KUMAR SANGHI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
