The High Court of Delhi disposed of W.P.(C) 821/2016 by dismissing the writ petition as withdrawn with liberty to file a better petition containing certain inadvertently omitted facts.
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.
$~68
DR. MEHMODA AHMED ..... Petitioner Through: Mr Vinay K. Shailendra and Mr W. Kasar, Advocates
versus
GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr Yeeshu Jain and Ms Jyoti Tyagi, Advocates for R-1 & 2 Mr Dhanesh Relan, Advocate for R-3
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA O R D E R % 02.02.2016
The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this writ petition with liberty to file a better petition, in as much as, certain facts have been inadvertently left out.
The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty.
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
FEBRUARY 02, 2016 rs
DR. MEHMODA AHMED
GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI
ADARSH KUMAR TYAGI
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
