A writ petition (WPMS No. 1328 of 2017) was dismissed as rendered infructuous after the petitioner's counsel stated it no longer required adjudication.
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.
2025:UHC:4630
| SL. No. |
Date | Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures |
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS No.1328 of 2017 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Ms. Ruchika Negi, learned counsel, holding brief of Mr. Sandeep Kothari, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Tarun Lakhera, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the instant writ petition has rendered infructuous. 5. In view of the statement, as given by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the instant writ petition is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 06.06.2025 R.Bisht |
2025:UHC:4630
Rakesh Thapliyal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
