The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging an election notification for default and non-prosecution as the petitioner's counsel was absent despite a prior notice.
Writ petition dismissed for default and non-prosecution without costs.
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.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
WRIT PETITION No.296 of 2014
ORDER :
As there was no representation for the petitioner on 27.01.2020, the writ petition was directed to be listed under the caption “ FOR DISMISSAL” today.
Even today, despite the matter being listed under the caption “ FOR DISMISSAL”, when the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner is not present and there is no representation on his behalf. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the matter. Moreover, the petitioner is challenging the Election Notification issued in the year 2013.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for default and for non-prosecution. No order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this
writ petition shall stand closed.
__________________________________ JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
03.02.2020 Prv
2
Petitioner
State of Tripura and others
Abhinand Kumar Shavili
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
