Petitioners withdrew the writ petition as they had been allotted alternate accommodation. The Court dismissed the present writ petition and accompanying application as satisfied.
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.
DAYA AND OTHERS ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Lalit Kumar, Advocate.
versus
DELHI URBAN SHELTER IMPROVEMENT BOARD & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Parvinder Chauhan, Advocate for respondent No.1. Ms. Pooja, Advocate for Mr. Raghvender Pandey, Advocate for respondent No.2.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
Learned counsel for petitioners states that petitioners No.1 to 5 have been allotted alternate accommodation. Consequently, he does not wish to press the present writ petition any further.
Accordingly, present writ petition and application are dismissed as satisfied.
MANMOHAN, J
FEBRUARY 15, 2016
js
DAYA AND OTHERS
DELHI URBAN SHELTER IMPROVEMENT BOARD
ANR
MANMOHAN
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
