Smt. Rajeshwari Kumar v. Union Of India, Through Secretary, Ministry Of Road
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. State Of Rajasthan Through Additional Chief Secretary, Department Of Urban Development And Housing, Secretariat, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jay Vardhan Joshi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vedant Sharma Mr. Deepak Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN 29/04/2025 Order Learned counsel for the…
Judgment
Smt. Rajeshwari Kumar W/o Shri Apurv Kumar, Aged About 63 Years, R/o Plot-27-28, Shri Vihar Colony, Jln Marg, Jaipur. Versus ----Petitioner
Union Of India, Through Secretary, Ministry Of Road Transport And Highways, Having Its Regional Office Situated At Ajmer Road, Opposite Elements Mall, Ajmera Garden, Shanti Nagar, Dcm, Jaipur- 302019.
National Highway Authority Of India, Through Its Chairman, Having Its Regional Office Situated At F-120, Janpath, Shyam Nagar, Jaipur- 302019.
State Of Rajasthan Through Additional Chief Secretary, Department Of Urban Development And Housing, Secretariat, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jay Vardhan Joshi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vedant Sharma Mr. Deepak Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN 29/04/2025 Order Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of reply submitted by respondent No.2- National Highways Authority of India, this writ petition has become infructuous as there has been no publication of 3D notification after the publication of notification under section 3A of the National Highway Act, 1956 therefore, the 3A notification is considered lapse because more than a year has passed. [2025:RJ-JP:17913] (2 of 2) [CW-18828/2023] In view of above submissions, this civil writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. Stay application as well as pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. GAUTAM JAIN /182 (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J
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.