Petitioner's counsel stated the petitioner had expired, rendering the writ petition infructuous. The court disposed of the matter on that ground.
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.
$~14
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
BALWINDER SINGH ..... Petitioner
Through Dr. L.S. Chaudhary with Mr. Ajay Chaudhary, Ms. Reema Bhola and Mr. Parambir Singh, Advocates.
versus
THE HON'BLE LG, DELHI & ANR ..... Respondents Through Mr. Siddharth Dutta, Advocate.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA O R D E R
% 06.12.2016
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has expired. He submits that since the petitioner has expired, the petition has become infructuous.
The petition is disposed of as infructuous.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
DECEMBER 06, 2016 st
Balwinder Singh
The Hon'ble LG, Delhi & Anr
Sanjeev 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
