The writ petition was disposed of as not pressed in view of the settlement arrived between the petitioner and the respondent school, recorded via a letter dated 8.11.2016.
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.
$~15
SUNITA KAINTH ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Iqbal Singh and Mr. M.K.Pandey, Advocates.
versus
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Rishikesh Kumar (ASC) and Mr. Premsagar Pal, Advocates for R-1 and 2. Mr. Jasmeet Singh, Adv. for R-3.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J. MEHTA O R D E R % 07.12.2016
that the disputes between the petitioner and respondent no.3-school have been settled. This statement is recorded in the letter dated 8.11.2016 of the
petitioner to the respondent no.3-school and which is taken on record.
account of the settlement having been arrived at.
VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J
DECEMBER 07, 2016/ ib
Sunita Kaint
Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors
Valmikij Mehta
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
