H COURTOF JUOICATURE AT BILASPUR {C.G.I v. RESPQNbENTS
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
PARTICUALRS OF THE PETTTIONER As per the cause title
PARTICUALRS OF THE RESPONbENTS As per the cause title !^j|j^1!^^ &3L2a! -3^'=q'PII?Ni^atBTI?, fiK'tl'M^ sf^f xra^ tIIWH SBNIctl 'B'i. 20B (ci'bitar" sn^iqii h-v* 3D^r ^^fi^ ^Ii^ aii^r^giw^f?cr
09.11.a004 ^l^ld5tiiTt HWsS "4 ^Si ^^K ir diFitt) si^a On a mention beiag made,|
Shri Sanjay FMeI, coi.msel[ Shri N.K. Agarwal, Deputy) Shri Saiijay K Agam'al, Coj the case is taken iip for hearing. |for fhe petitioaer. - [Advocate General, for tlie State, [insel for Respoiident No.3. Heard leamed counsel for Learaed counsel for fhe p^ iacorrect document argued Naaab Ward No. 15 is 9.06%, wNt; by counsel for respondent No.3 t|ie pie parties. ?titioaer whfle placiag reliaace on an Scheduled Caste population of ;reas as per tlie docuiaent subnutted population of Scbeduled Castes of Nanak Ward No.15 is 17.98% afei in descendJng order that coiues to Sr.No.2. Therefore, as per gi Municipalities Act, 1961 reserval flrovisions of Section 29-A of fhe lion has been correctlv made. After goiag through the i-espondent No.3, counsel ^ocuinent subm.itted by coiuisel tbr petitioner has no grievauce. the • Accordingly, fb.e petition is disnii^ •Oonsequently, M.W.P. 444 p/04 &I.A. Nos.8257/04 also staiid dismj.ssed, ~SSI- L.C. Bhadoo Judge ,/ —'l^^ ['fl^ife^ ll!l
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Municipalities Act, 1961.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Chhattisgarh High Court, on 09 Nov 2004.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.