Two writ petitions were dismissed as withdrawn. The withdrawal was pursuant to a letter dated 28.12.2015 issued by the respondent, satisfying a condition in the contract awarded to the petitioner.
Writ petitions dismissed as withdrawn; miscellaneous applications allowed.
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.
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AM UL YA
IL^
contract to the petitioner. One of the conditions for awarding the contractto the petitioneris that the petitionerwould withdrawthese writ petitionsand that is why these applicationshave been filed. The withdrawalis pursuant to the letter dated 28.12.2015 issued by the respondentand copy of which is annexed to the applications.The applications are allowed. The writ petitions are dismissed as withdrawn.
W.P.(0 10452/2015 & W.P.fO 10472/2015
•it.-
^
In view of the order passed in the miscellaneous applications being CM No. 999/2016 &CM No. 1000/2016today itself,the writ petitions stand dismissedas withdrawn.Dasti.
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J
•— ^ejL^ SANJJ W SACHDEVA,J
JANUARY 12, 2016
rs
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the withdrawal of writ petitions pursuant to the contract condition and letter dated 28.12.2015 warrants dismissal of the petitions.
BADAR DURREZ AHMED
SANJJ W SACHDEVA
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
