AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
5 paragraphs · 135 wordsAhanthem Bimol Singh, J
Heard Mr. Karung H. Kom, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. S. Niranjan, learned GA appearing for the respondents.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that during the pendency of the present writ petition the enquiry conducted against the husband of the petitioner under the Manipur Public Servants’ Personal Liability Act, 2005 has been closed and accordingly, it has been submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that no cause survives for adjudication on merit of the case and that the present writ petition can be closed as infructuous.
Mr. S. Niranjan, learned GA appearing for the respondents endorses the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
In view of the submission made above, the present writ petition is hereby closed as infructuous.