The petition was dismissed for want of prosecution as the petitioner failed to appear twice despite due notice and the order was made clear that no further adjournment would be granted. Pending miscellaneous applications were also disposed of.
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
106
CWP-31071-2018 (O&M) Date of Decision : 16.05.2024
SAURAV BHARDWAJ … PETITIONER
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ... RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL
Present : None for the petitioner.
Mr. Prajwal Chauhan, Central Govt. Counsel for the respondents.
JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral)
“ On request, adjourned to 16.05.2024.
To be shown in urgent.
It is made clear that no further adjournment shall be granted. ”
| 16.05.2024 | (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) | |
|---|---|---|
| anju | JUDGE | |
| Whether speaking/reasoned | Yes/No | |
| Whether reportable | Yes/No |
Anju Goel 2024.05.16 15:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
Saurav Bhardwaj
Union of India
Jagmohan Bansal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
