The appeal was not pursued by the appellant; no objection removal or refiling occurred despite Registry objections under Punjab High Court Rules. The matter was disposed of without further order by consigning the file to the record.
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
131 INCOMP-1295-2024
DATE OF DECISION: 16.12.2024
BALJIT SINGH … Petitioner (s)
Versus
STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER, PUNJAB AND ORS.
... Respondent(s )
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI
Present: No n e.
ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (ORAL)
T h e appeal was filed on 20.08.202 2 . Certain objections were raise d by the Registry. However, learned counsel neit h er appeared before the Registr y nor collected the file to remove the objections.
As p er Rule 9, Chapter 1, Part-A, V olume V, Punjab and Haryan a High Court Rules and Orders, the petition on w h ich objections have been raise d by the Registry i s to be taken back by the cou n sel/party, who filed it, to be re - filed within a tot a l period of 40 days.
It i s apparent that the appellant is not interested in pursuing th e appeal. No further order is required to be pass e d. The file be consigned to th e record. Lib e rty to apply.
(ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL) JUDGE
(LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE 16.12.2024 SwarnjitS Whet h er speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whet h er reportable : Yes / No
SWARNJIT SINGH 2024.12.16 17:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Baljit Singh
State Information Commissioner, Punjab
Anupinder Singh Grewal
Lapita Banerji
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
