The petitioner asserted that grievances were already addressed, leading the court to dispose of the writ petition without further directions.
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.
$~10
MANGALAM PLACE WELFARE ASSOCIATION (REGD.)..... Petitioner Through: Mr Devashish Maharishi, Adv. for Mr Avadh Kaushik, Adv.
versus
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr Arjun Pant, Adv. with Mr I.S. Nanda, JE (Civil, RPD XI) for the DDA. Mr Ajjay Aroraa, Adv. with Ms Diksha Lal, Adv. for NDMC.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR O R D E R % 03.11.2016
The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the grievances of the petitioner have already been taken care of.
Consequently, no further directions are needed in this writ petition. The same stands disposed of.
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J
NOVEMBER 03, 2016 kb
Mangalam Place Welfare Association (Regd.)
Delhi Development Authority & Ors.
Badar Durrez Ahmed
Ashutosh Kumar
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
