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

RABINDRA PRASAD PATTNAIK – Appellant
Versus
THE DM-CUM-COLLECTOR – Respondent


Advocates:
['PRADEEP KUMAR MOHAPATRA', '', 'S MOHANTY', 'A MOHAPATRA']

Page 1 of 2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No.6374 of 2022

Rabindra Prasad Pattnaik & Ors.

&.

Petitioner(s)

Mr. P.K. Mohapatra,

Advocate

-versus-

The D.M.-cum-Collector & Anr.

&.

Opposite Parties

Mr. S. Ghose,

Additional Standing Counsel

CORAM:

JUSTICE BISWANATH RATH

Order No.

ORDER

14.03.2022

01.

1.

Learned counsel for Petitioners alleges that in the first round

of litigation basing on the submission of the competent authority that

there is abandonment of the scheme for which the Petitioners had

pending application, the Court after recording the statement of the

public authority permitted the Petitioners to file application for

refund of money and in such event there was also direction to

consider such request of the Petitioners. It is stated through the

records more particularly at Annexures-1 & 2 that the Petitioners

applying the provisions under the R.T.I. Act, 2005 have been

intimated that neither there is any action in abandonment of the

proposal nor there is any agenda till date of supply of the

information on 22.01.2022. This Court here

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