R.S.DHAVAN, V.P.GOEL
NEELABH PRAKASHAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent
( 1 ) THIS Court has heard these matters at length since 24/02/1999 on different dates. Various counsel of the petitioners have been heard. Those who addressed the Court are Messrs. Sunil Ambwani, Tarun Agarwal, Madhur Prasad and Ravi Kant; on behalf of the State respondents, learned Advocate General and the Chief Standing Counsel.
( 2 ) THE petitioners vehemently prayed that the Court grant a stay order on the Government Order dated 1-12-1998 which has been issued pendente lite the matters pending at the Supreme Court. It is contended that the State of Uttar Pradesh itself was the appellant at the Supreme Court and these Government Orders should not have been issued. It has been brought to the notice of the Court by these petitioners that in similar cases another Honble Division Bench has from time to time passed ad interim orders in writ petitions as and when filed, staying the Government Orders by rendering them inapplicable against a petitioner. It is contended that if this Court may not be persuaded to pass a general order staying the Government Orders, then, it may follow the ad interim order of another Division Bench on each petition, separately, as an ad
Referred to : Satya Narain Kapoor v. State of U. P.
Reffered to : Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd. v. Church of S.I.T. Assocn.
Purshottam Dass Tandon v. State of U. P.
Central Inland Water Transport Corpn. Ltd. v. Brojo Nath
E.Compan Trusty v. Kanzia Mann and Co.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.