Shalein Chauhan v. State Of Uttarakhand through Chief Secretary
WPSB/61/2016 · 2025-07-02
Manoj Kumar Tiwari, Subhash Upadhyay
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 634 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 634 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
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. 61 of 2016
Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Subhash Upadhyay, J.
Mr. Rakshit Srivastava, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Ramji Srivastava, Advocate for the petitioner.
2. Mr. Dinesh Bankoti, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand / respondent no. 1.
3. Mr. Krishnakant Joshi, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Dharmendra Barthwal, Advocate for respondent no. 3.
4. Mr. Rakshit Srivastava, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Ramji Srivastava, Advocate for the petitioner, makes a statement at the bar that the writ petition has become infructuous by efflux of time.
5. In view of the statement made by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous.
(Subhash Upadhyay, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)
02.07.2025 Navin