Sikkim High Court
WP(C)/26/2013 of Sikkim Meat Vendors Association & Ors Vs State Of Sikkim and Ors. on 29 April 2014
COURT OF SIKKIM CIVIL JURISDICTION W.P.(C) No. 26 of 2013 Sikkim Meat Vendors Assn. & Ors. vs. State of Sikkim & Ors. BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N.K. JAIN 06. 29.04.14 Present: M/s. A . Moulik, Sr. Advocate with K.D. Bhutia and Manish Kr. Jain, Advocates for the
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM CIVIL JURISDICTION
W.P.(C) No. 26 of 2013
Sikkim Meat Vendors Assn. & Ors.
vs.
State of Sikkim & Ors.
BEFORE
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N.K. JAIN
06. 29.04.14 Present: M/s. A. Moulik, Sr. Advocate with K.D. Bhutia and Manish Kr. Jain, Advocates for the Petitioners.
M/s J.B. Pradhan, Addl. Advocate General and Karma Thinlay, Sr. Govt. Advocate with S.K. Chettri and Pollin Rai, Asstt. Govt. Advocates for State-respondents.
Mrs. Samita Sharma, Legal Retainer for AHLF & VS Deptt.
M/s. D.K. Siwakoti and Sedenla Bhutia, Advocates for respondent No. 3.
…
In view of order passed in CMA No. 113/2014, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh writ petition, in case necessity so arises.
Chief Justice
29.04.2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
CMA No. 113 of 2014 in W.P.(C) No. 26 of 2013
Sikkim Meat Vendors Assn. & Ors.
vs.
State of Sikkim & Ors.
BEFORE
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N.K. JAIN
01. 29.04.14 Present:
M/s A. Moulik, Sr. Advocate with K.D. Bhutia and Manish Kr. Jain, Advocates for the Petitioners.
M/s J.B. Pradhan, Addl. Advocate General and Karma Thinlay, Sr. Govt. Advocate with S.K. Chettri and Pollin Rai, Asstt. Govt. Advocates for State-respondents.
Mrs. Samita Sharma, Legal Retainer for AHLF & VS Deptt.
M/s. D.K. Siwakoti and Sedenla Bhutia, Advocates for respondent No. 3.
…
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the matter has been settled out of Court. Therefore, he has filed an application for withdrawal of the writ petition, which may be allowed and the writ petition be allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh one, in case of necessity so arises. The prayer is not opposed by the learned counsel for the respondents.
Consequently, the Application is allowed. The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty, as prayed for.
Chief Justice 29.04.2014