Petitioners challenged a notification allegedly superseded by a subsequent one. The court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous without addressing the merits.
Petition dismissed as infructuous.
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
CWP No.10049 of 1994 Date of decision:10.07.2012
M/s Ram Kumar Rajesh Kumar & others .....Petitioners
Versus
The Union of India & another .....Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.S.SANDHAWALIA
Present: Mr.Sandeep Khunger, Advocate, for the petitioners,
Mr.Vijay K.Chaudhary, AAG, Punjab.
G.S.SANDHAWALIA J. (Oral)
is under challenge in the present writ petition stands superseded by a subsequent notification and therefore, the present case has been rendered infructuous.
10.07.2012 (G.S.SANDHAWALIA) sailesh JUDGE
M/s Ram Kumar Rajesh Kumar & others
The Union of India & another
G.S. Sandhawalia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
