Petitioner sought withdrawal of W.P. before seeking redressal at CAT. Court allowed exemption in CM application and dismissed petition as withdrawn.
Exemption allowed; petition dismissed as withdrawn.
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.
$~1
SITA RAM ..... Petitioner Through Satya Siddiqui, Mr. Sarfraz Ahmed and Mr. Shyam Singh, Advocates.
versus
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANR
..... Respondent
Through Mr. Arun Birbal, Advocate .
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA
O R D E R % 16.02.2016
CM Appln. No.30498/2015
Exemption, as prayed for, is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
This application is disposed off.
WP(C) No.11527/2015 & CM Appln. No.30497/2015
At the outset, and without going into the merits, counsel for the petitioner states that she wishes to withdraw this petition, and to take appropriate steps for redressal of the petitioner’s grievances before the Central Administrative Tribunal, and as per law. She is permitted to do so.
The petition, along with CM Appln. No.30497/2015, is dismissed as withdrawn.
SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J
FEBRUARY 16, 2016 dr
Sita Ram
Delhi Development Authority
Sudershan Kumar Misra
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
