The court disposed of the writ petition as it was not pressed by counsel following the receipt of a status report. Conflicting miscellaneous applications were declared infructuous and disposed of.
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.
$~23
RIPUNJAY TIWARI ..... Petitioner
Through : Mr. Mahesh Kumar Sharma, Adv.
versus
EAST DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ..... Respondent Through : Mr. Rajeev Tiwari, Adv.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK
O R D E R
%
02.03.2016
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the status
report filed by the respondent, present petition is not being pressed and be disposed of. Petition is disposed of as not pressed. Miscellaneous applications are disposed of as infructuous.
A.K. PATHAK, J.
MARCH 02, 2016 rb
Ripunjay Tiwari
East Delhi Municipal Corporation
A.K. Pathak
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
