Rajendra Ojha vs. State Of Odisha
Held
The Court allowed the petitioner to withdraw the application. The interim order, if any, was also vacated.
Facts
The petitioner filed an application before the High Court. During the course of hearing, the petitioner's counsel sought permission to withdraw the application.
Key Issues
The primary issue was whether the petitioner should be allowed to withdraw the application filed before the High Court.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 15.12.2025
1. Heard Mr. Jena, learned counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. Swain, learned AGA for the State and Mr. Kedia, learned Jr. Standing Counsel, CGST, Central excise & Customs for the Opposite Party No.2. 2. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioner seeks leave to withdraw this ABLAPL.
Accordingly, the ABLAPL stands disposed of as withdrawn.
Interim order stands vacated.
(V. NARASINGH)
Judge Ayesha
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Orissa High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.