105 MANINDER PAL SINGH DISTRICT MAGISTRATE CUM APPELLANT AUTHORITY AND OTHERS CORAM: Present: HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (Oral) 1. which request, the same was got adjourned on the request of counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and on 05.04.2025, the same was again got adjourned by circulating an adjournment slip. Today representation on behalf of the petitioner. Hence, it can be safely presumed that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing the present writ petition. 2. 24-04-2025 Sapna Goyal NOTE: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-8927 Date of Decision : 24 MANINDER PAL SINGH VERSUS DISTRICT MAGISTRATE CUM APPELLANT AUTHORITY AND OTHERS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI None for the petitioner. Mr. Rohit Kaushik, Advocate and Mr. Tanmoy Gupta, Advocate for the respondents. HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (Oral) The present petition was taken up for hearing on 02.04.2025 on which request, the same was got adjourned on the request of counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and on 05.04.2025, the same was again got adjourned by circulating an adjournment slip. Today representation on behalf of the petitioner. Hence, it can be safely presumed that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing the present writ petition. Dismissed for non-prosecution. 2025 (HARSIMRAN SINGH S NOTE: Whether speaking: YES Whether reportable: NO IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 8927-2025 Date of Decision : 24-04-2025 ........Petitioner VERSUS DISTRICT MAGISTRATE CUM APPELLANT AUTHORITY AND ........Respondent(s) HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI Rohit Kaushik, Advocate and Advocate HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (Oral) esent petition was taken up for hearing on 02.04.2025 on which request, the same was got adjourned on the request of counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and on 05.04.2025, the same was again got adjourned by circulating an adjournment slip. Today, again there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Hence, it can be safely presumed that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing the present writ petition. prosecution. (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE speaking: YES NO DISTRICT MAGISTRATE CUM APPELLANT AUTHORITY AND ........Respondent(s) HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI esent petition was taken up for hearing on 02.04.2025 on which request, the same was got adjourned on the request of counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and on 05.04.2025, the same was again , again there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Hence, it can be safely presumed ETHI) SAPNA GOYAL 2025.04.25 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document