Disposed
Hc Rajesh Kumar v. UOI & Nar
Delhi HCW.P.(C)/11373/2006
Case brief
AI extract
What is this about?
The Delhi High Court declared the present writ petition infructuous and disposed of it as not pressed because the standing order challenged was already implemented in the petitioner's case.
What the court decided
AI extract
¶1
$~R-70
¶2
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
¶3
- W.P.(C) 11373/2006 HC RAJESH KUMAR ..... Petitioner
¶4
Through: Mr. Abhishek Tiwari, Advocate for Mr.A.K. Trivedi, Advocate
¶5
versus
¶6
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Ms. Shruti Banerjee, Advocate for Mr.Anurag Ahluwalia, Advocate
¶7
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
¶8
O R D E R
¶9
%
¶10
12.02.2016
¶11
- Learned proxy counsel appearing for Mr. A.K. Trivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner, states that the present writ petition has been rendered infructuous during the pendency of the petition for the reason that the Standing Order No.24/2001, issued by the respondent-CRPF, has been implemented in petitioner’s case.
Parties & counsel
AI extract
- petitioner
Rajesh Kumar
- respondent
Union of India
Coram
AI extract
Hima Kohli
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court