Writ petition concerning constitution of a Bench at Nainital; petitioner stated the Bench had been constituted and hearing was at final stage, so the court dismissed the petition as infructuous.
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.
| SL. No |
Date | Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures |
COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS |
|---|---|---|---|
| WPSB No.36 of 2024 Hon’ble Ritu Bahri, C.J. Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma, J. 1. Heard Mr. Sanjiv Chaturvedi, petitioner, in- person and Mr. V.K. Kaparuwan, learned Standing Counsel for the Union of India. 2. The petitioner submits that now the Bench has already been constituted at Nainital and hearing in the matter is at the final stage. 3. In view of the above, this writ petition has been rendered infructuous, 4. The present Writ Petition (S/B) No.36 of 2024 is dismissed as infructuous. |
|||
| (Alok Kumar Verma, J.) (Ritu Bahri, C.J.) 02.05.2024 02.05.2024 Shiv/ JKJ |
Sanjiv Chaturvedi
Union of India
Ritu Bahri
Alok Kumar Verma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
