This court disposed of the writ petition as infructuous owing to a subsequent amendment in the Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Act, 1952.
Petition 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 HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 11661 of 1992 Date of decision: 3.07.2013
Kamlawati Duggal
....... Petitioner
versus
The Chief Administrator, Chandigarh and another
....... Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Kumar Mittal Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jaspal Singh
Ajay Kumar Mittal, J.(Oral)
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that in view of the subsequent amendment in the Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Act, 1952, the writ petition has been rendered infructuous and may be disposed of as such.
Ordered accordingly.
[AJAY KUMAR MITTAL] JUDGE
[JASPAL SINGH] JUDGE
3rd July, 2013
Shivani Kaushik
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Kamlawati Duggal
The Chief Administrator, Chandigarh
Another
Ajay Kumar Mittal
Jaspal Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
