Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SHEMI JAIN versus THE STATE OF U.P.THORUGH SECY., MEDICAL EDUCATION & HEALTH

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Shemi Jain v. The State Of U.P.Thorugh Secy., Medical Education & Health - CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. 476 of 1995 [2004] RD-AH 658 (26 August 2004)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court No.48

Civil Misc. Contempt Petition No. 476 of 1995

Shemi Jain................................. Petitioner/Applicant

Vs.

State of U.P.  and another........................Respondents/Opposite Parties

Hon'ble S.P. Mehrotra, J.

The controversy involved in the present contempt petition relates to admissions to Government Medical Colleges in the State of U.P. by migration or transfer from various recognized and unrecognized Medical Colleges outside the State of U.P..

The contempt petition was listed before the Court on 5.8.2004. On the said date, i.e., 5.8.2004, the case was passed over, and was directed to be listed in the next cause list, as the learned counsel for the petitioner /applicant was not present even when the case was taken up in the revised list.

Pursuant to the said order dated 5.8.2004, the case was listed before the Court on 12.8.2004. On the said date, i.e., 12.8.2004, learned counsel for the petitioner / applicant was again not present even when the case was taken up in the revised list. In the circumstances, the case was passed over and was directed to be listed in the next cause list.

The case was thereafter listed before the Court on 19.8.2004. On the said date, i.e., 19.8.2004, learned counsel for the petitioner / applicant was again not present even when the case was taken up in the revised list. As such, the case was passed over and was directed to be listed in the next cause list.

Pursuant to the said order dated 19.8.2004, the case is listed today before the Court. The case has been taken up in the revised list. Learned counsel for the petitioner /applicant is not present.

Having regard to the nature of the controversy involved in the present case, and also having taken note of the fact that none is appearing on behalf of the petitioner/applicant for the last various dates including today, it appears that the present contempt petition has become infructuous by lapse of time.

The contempt petition is accordingly dismissed as having become infructuous.

In consequence of the dismissal of the contempt petition, show cause notices issued to the opposite parties are discharged.

Dt.26.8.2004

safi


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.