Is this order a binding or persuasive precedent for writ practice or interim order vacation in future cases?
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | WP(C)/23453/2014 of GOURI DASH Vs STATE |
| CNR | ODHC010201512014 |
| Date of Registration | 29-11-2014 |
| Decision Date | 17-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | Disposed Off |
| Judgment Author | Dr. Justice Sanjeeb K Panigrahi |
| Court | Orissa High Court |
| Bench | Single Judge (Dr. Justice S.K. Panigrahi) |
| Precedent Value | No substantive legal precedent; limited to administrative disposal |
| Type of Law | Writ – Civil Procedure |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | None – No stated legal ratio, not binding precedent |
| Persuasive For | None – Order is confined to administrative procedure |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- The judgment demonstrates batch disposal of multiple related writ petitions in summary form, with all interim orders expressly vacated as part of the final order.
- No legal principle, statutory interpretation, or clarification on writ procedure is provided in the order.
- Lawyers should note that such summary disposal orders do not serve as precedent for substantive legal arguments.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The court notes that all writ petitions were heard together.
- Separate judgments were issued (content of which is not part of this order), but as per the sheet provided, the order merely records their disposal.
- It further provides that any interim orders previously granted in all listed writ petitions stood vacated upon disposal.
- No reference to precedent, reasoning, or statutory analysis is present in this excerpt.
Factual Background
- The judgment relates to a batch of writ petitions listed before the Orissa High Court for disposal.
- W.P.(C) No.23452 of 2014 and related petitions (including W.P.(C) No.23453/2014) were taken up together via a hybrid arrangement in presence of counsels.
- No further facts, allegations, or dispute details are summarized in the order.
Statutory Analysis
No statutory provisions are discussed or interpreted in the order.
Dissenting / Concurring Opinion Summary
No concurring or dissenting opinions are recorded.
Procedural Innovations
- The judgment exemplifies summary batch disposal and express vacation of all interim orders across linked cases.
- No new precedent or procedural guideline is set forth.
Alert Indicators
- Precedent Followed – The order represents standard practice concerning batch disposal and interim order vacation, with no departure from accepted procedure.