Petition seeking direction for Continuous Discharge Certificate was disposed of as relief was already granted to petitioners by the competent authority during pendency of the writ.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.717 OF 1995
Roop Singh & Ors. .. Petitioners
V/s
Union of India & Ors. .. Respondents
Ms.Usha Singh i/by M/s.Vyas & Bhalwal for the
Petitioners.
Mr.D.A.Dube for the Respondents.
CORAM : DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN &
SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, JJ.
DATE : 07th November, 2006.
P.C.:
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. In this
petition, the petitioners have mainly sought relief in
the nature of direction to the Respondents for issuance
of Continuous Discharge Certificate (C.D.C.).
Undisputedly, during the pendency of this petition, the
petitioners had applied for C.D.C., which application
was considered by the competent Authority and the
petitioners have been granted C.D.C. In view of the
fact that the Petitioners have received the Continuous
Discharge Certificate (C.D.C.), nothing further survives
in this petition.
2. Accordingly, the Petition stands disposed of in
terms of the C.D.Cs.already granted. The Rule stands
discharged. There shall be no order as to costs.
(SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.) (DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.)
Roop Singh & Ors.
Union of India & Ors.
DR.S.Radhakrishnan
V.K.Tahilramani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court