This court dismissed a writ petition for non-prosecution as the petitioner's counsel was not available, noting that the relief sought had already become infructuous due to recovery of the amount.
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
Civil Writ Petition No. 16735 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision : 23.08.2012
Rakesh Kumar
... Petitioner
vs
State of Punjab and others
..Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal
Present: None for the petitioner.
Mr. Satish Bhanot, Additional Advocate General, Punjab.
Rajesh Bindal, J.
As per office report, service of respondent No.5 is not
complete.
Prayer in the present petition is for a direction to the Employees' Compensation Commissioner to get the amount recovered from the employer in terms of the order dated 08.09.2008.
In short reply by way of affidavit, filed by Employees' Compensation Commissioner-cum -Assistant Labour Commissioner, Moga it is stated that the amount as well as interest thereon has been recovered from the employer and paid to the petitioner.
Considering the aforesaid fact, prayer made in the present petition is apparently rendered infructuous. However, as the counsel for the petitioner is not available, the present petition is dismissed for nonprosecution.
(RAJESH BINDAL) JUDGE
23.08.2012 sharmila
Rakesh Kumar
State of Punjab
Employees' Compensation Commissioner and others
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
