Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 3]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Dr. Vijay Kumar Nigam vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 19 June, 2017

                               WP-1740-2008
              (DR. VIJAY KUMAR NIGAM Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)


19-06-2017

None for the petitioner even in the passover round. Shri Ajay Ojha, learned counsel for State of C.G. Shri Puneet Shroti, learned Panel Lawyer for State of M.P. I.A. No.14894/16 is taken up.

Shri Ojha submits that in the year 2008 the petitioner's age was about 52 years (approximately). By now he has crossed the age of superannuation and must have retired. Hence, the petition has rendered infructuous.

There is nobody on behalf of the petitioner to oppose the said contention.

Accordingly, the said I.A. is allowed and the petition is dismissed as having rendered infructuous.

(SUJOY PAUL) JUDGE mohsin