The petitioner sought review of a prior order. The court dismissed the petition as infructuous on the ground that the impugned order had already been complied with.
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.
VINOD KUMAR 2015.12.17 15:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
COCP No.2172 of 2014 Date of decision:17.12.2015
Surekha Rani
...Petitioner
Versus
Sh. Vivek Atrey, IAS ...Respondent
CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain
Present: Mr. Jitender Nara, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. P.P.Chahar, DAG, Haryana.
Rakesh Kumar Jain, J. (Oral)
Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that since the order passed by this Court has been complied with, therefore, the present petition has become infructuous.
Dismissed as infructuous accordingly.
December 17, 2015 ( Rakesh Kumar Jain) vinod* Judge
Surekha Rani
Sh. Vivek Atrey
Rakesh Kumar Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
