Dr. (Mrs.) Savitri Hamal vs Municipal Commissioner and Ors.
Party Details
- Dr. (Mrs.) Savitri Hamal
- Municipal Commissioner and Ors.
- Licencing Authority
- Mrs. P.M. Bhutia
- Manas Kumar Khan
Case Summary
Dr. (Mrs.) Savitri Hamal filed Case No. WP(C) /3/2018 in the Sikkim High Court on 13 Mar 2018 against Municipal Commissioner and Ors. and Licencing Authority. The case has had one hearing so far. The case was disposed of on 4 May 2018. 3 orders have been issued in this matter.
Hearing History (1)
- 4MAY 2018Disposal
Judge: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Meenakshi Madan Rai
Orders (3)
- 4MAY 2018judgementView Order ↗
Order No: 3
- 26APR 2018orderView Order ↗
Order No: 2
- 23MAR 2018orderView Order ↗
Order No: 1
Judgement DetailsView full order PDF ↗
THE HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM : GANGTOK (Civil Extraordinary Jurisdiction) DATED : 4th May, 2018 -------------------------------------------------- SINGLE BENCH : THE HON’BLE MRS.
JUSTICE MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI, JUDGE -------------------------------------------------- WP(C) No.03 of 2018 Petitioner : Dr. (Mrs.) Savitri Hamal, W/o Dr.
D.
S.
Hamal, Aged about 65 years, R/o Pani House, Opposite Shiva Mandir, P.O.
Deorali, P.S.
Gangtok, East Sikkim. versus Respondents : 1.
The Municipal Commissioner, Gangtok Municipal Corporation, Deorali, East Sikkim.
2.
The Licensing Authority, Gangtok Municipal Corporation, Deorali, East Sikkim.
3.
Mrs.
P.
M.
Bhutia, W/o Late Ngodup Tshering Bhutia, R/o Arithang Road, S.
Golai, Middle Arithang, P.O. & P.S.
Gangtok, Pin – 737 101, East Sikkim.
4.
Manas Kumar Khan, S/o Mr.
Jitendra Khan, Flat No.B/10/202, Peerless Nagar, Pani Khardah, North 24 Parganas, Pin – 700 114, West Bengal.
Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India WP(C) No.03 of 2018 2 Dr. (Mrs.) Sabitri Hamal vs.
Municipal Commissioner, Gangtok Municipal Corporation and Others ------------------------------ Appearance Mr.
Hamal and Ms.
Priyanka Chettri, Advocates for the Petitioner.
Ms.
Tashi Doma Sherpa, Advocate for the Respondents No.1 and 2.
Rupa Dhakal, Advocate for the Respondents No.3 and 4. ------------------------------ O R D E R (ORAL) Meenakshi Madan Rai, J.
1.
Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that he does not press the Writ Petition and seeks permission to withdraw the same.
Not opposed.
Both Learned Counsel also submit that the matter has been amicably resolved between them.
In the circumstances, Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. withdrawn. ( Meenakshi Madan Rai ) Judge 04-05-2018 Approved for reporting : No Internet : Yes ds