A writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution because the petitioners failed to appear despite issuance of notice. Some petitioners had died, refused service, or gone abroad, while one was served but did not attend.
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.
206
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No.4245 of 1999 (O&M) Date of Decision: 04.09.2024
Jaswant Singh and others
…Petitioners
Versus
Gram Panchayat, Malikpur and another
…Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SANDHAWALIA HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA
Present:None for the petitioners.
Mr. Sriansh Singh, Advocate and Mr. Sukhjinder Singh, Advocate for respondent No.1.
G.S. Sandhawalia, J.(Oral)
In pursuance of the order dated 04.07.2024, whereby notices
were issued to the petitioners, service report is as under:-
Petitioners No.1, 3 & 7-died Petitioners No.2 & 4-refused Petitioners No.5 & 6-gone abroad Petitioner No.8-served
Since none entered appearance on behalf of the petitioners, the
present writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.
(G.S. SANDHAWALIA) JUDGE
04.09.2024 (MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) neetu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether Reportable: No
NEETU RANI 2024.09.05 18:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment PHHC, CHD
Jaswant Singh and others
Gram Panchayat, Malikpur and another
G.S. Sandhawalia
Meenakshi I. Mehta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
