The petitioners sought permission to withdraw the writ petition due to specific instructions not to pursue the matter further.
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. 19444 of 2016
Date of decision: 24.07.2024
M/s Om Parkash Gopichand and another …. Petitioners Vs.
State of Haryana and others
….. Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL
Present: Mr. Ram Bilas Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Ankur Mittal, Addl. A.G. Haryana with Mr. Karan Jindal, Asstt. A.G. Haryana and Ms. Kushaldeep Kaur, Advocate.
Mr. Ghanshyam Meena, Advocate for Mr. Amar Vivek Aggarwal, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3.
ARUN PALLI, J (Oral)
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he be permitted
to withdraw the petition, for he has specific instructions not to pursue the matter any further.
Dismissed as withdrawn.
(ARUN PALLI) JUDGE
(VIKRAM AGGARWAL) JUDGE
24.07.2024 deepak Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No
DEEPAK KUMAR 2024.07.25 09:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document P & H High Court, Chandigarh
M/s Om Parkash Gopichand and another
State of Haryana and others
ARUN PALLI
VIKRAM AGGARWAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
