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

1969 Supreme(All) 8

A.K.KIRTY
Raghubar Dayal Kanodia – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent


Advocates:
Ambika Pd. and Jagdish Prasad, for Petitioner; H. N. Seth, for Opposite Parties.

ORDER :- These petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution raise a common question for determination. In both the petitions it is prayed that a Writ of certiorari be granted quashing the order dated 27-7-1967 which was passed individually against each petitioner. It is further prayed that writ of mandamus be issued directing the opposite parties not to disconnect or remove telephone No. 32702 in case of the petitioner in the first case and telephone No. 33262 in case of the petitioner in the second case. In both the petitions there is a further prayer also for an interim order commanding the opposite parties not to disconnect the said telephones. This Court issued an interim order in each case. It, however, appears that in Writ petition No. 3159 of 1967 the telephone of the petitioner was actually disconnected before the interim order passed by this Court was communicated to the Authorities concerned. In the second case, however, the stay order was communicated before the actual disconnection of the telephone.

2. Both the petitioners in the instant Writ petitions are businessmen having telephone connections in their business premises. A bill for the fixed rental for the period f














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