SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(Raj) 2540

H.R.PANWAR
Arun Kumar – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector & Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:G.R. Punia, Advocate.
For the Respondents: B.L. Tiwari, Addl. Govt., Counsel.

JUDGMENT

1. - By an application being I.A. No. 13883/08, the petitioner seeks to implead the State of Rajasthan as party respondent. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, the State of Rajasthan being a necessary party, the application is allowed and the State of Rajasthan is impleaded as party respondent.

2. By an another application being I.A. No. 13882/08, the petitioner seeks to take on record the document annexed with the application as Annex. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, since the document is relevant decision of criminal Court acquitting the petitioner, therefore, the application is allowed and the document annexed with the application as Annex. 7 is taken on record.

3. With the consent of learner: counsel for the parties, the writ petition is finally heard and decided at the admission stage.

4. By the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to quash the order Annex. 4 dated 6.7.2006 passed by respondent District Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar as also the order Annex. 6, dated 25.6.2007 passed by respondent Divisional Commissioner, Bikaner on an appeal filed by the petitioner against the 1 order Annex. 4.












Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top