Court finds writ petition infructuous as respondent suspended. Petition dismissed as such.
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 AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
C.W.P. No.11463 of 2012 Date of Decision: October 31, 2012
Pardeep Kumar
...... PETITIONER
Vs.
State of Haryana and others
..... RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH
Present: Mr.Saurabh Singla, Advocate for Mr.Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms.Kirti Singh, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for the State-respondent Nos.1 to 4 & 6.
Mr.Sanjay Chauhan, Advocate for respondent No.5.
RANJIT SINGH, J (Oral)
Though there is a written request for an adjournment on behalf of the counsel for the respondent No.7, it is pointed out that the present writ petition is rendered infructuous as the action has been taken against the respondent who has been placed under suspension from the office of Municipal Commissioner.
The writ petition, accordingly, has become infructuous and is dismissed as such.
(RANJIT SINGH) JUDGE
October 31, 2012 jt
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition has become infructuous due to suspension of the respondent.
Pardeep Kumar
State of Haryana
Ranjit Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
