The Single Judge Bench disposed of the writ petition as infructuous, as the issue was squarely covered by the Supreme Court decision in Municipal Committee, Patiala v. Model Town Resident, 2007(4) PLR 333.
The writ petition was disposed of 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 PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 3451 of 2003
Date of Decision: 14.02.2012
M/s Dharam Chand Ladha Mal
……… Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab & another
………… Respondents
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA
Present: Mr. A.C. Jain, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. C.M. Muugal, Advocate fro respondent No.2.
Mr. N.S. Pawar, Addl. A.G., Punjab.
RAJIV NARAIN RAINA, J.
squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of
Municipal Committee, Patiala v. Model Town Resident, 2007(4) PLR 333,
Consequently, the matter has been rendered infructuous. Disposed of as such.
14.2.2012 (RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) ‘sp’ Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the present writ petition requires to be disposed of after being rendered infructuous by a Supreme Court decision.
Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Municipal Committee, Patiala v. Model Town ResidentFollowed¶19
Municipal Committee, Patiala v. Model Town Resident, 2007(4) PLR 333
M/s Dharam Chand Ladha Mal
State of Punjab
another
Rajiv Narain Raina
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
