Dismissed

Dr Pushpendra Singh v. Delhi Technological University & Anr.

Delhi HC1 Apr 2016LPA/220/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The appellant sought to withdraw the Letters Patent Appeal. The High Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn along with pending applications, granting liberty to apply for early hearing of the writ petition and interlocutory application subject to the court notice.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to apply for expedited hearing of writ petition and interlocutory application. Appeal dismissed as withdrawn along with all pending applications.

Dr Pushpendra Singh Vs Delhi Technological University… — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2016)

¶1

$~14

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- LPA 220/2016, CM APPL.12172-12174/2016

¶4

DR PUSHPENDRA SINGH ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal with Ms. Simranjeet and Mr. Rajat Mathur, Advocates.

¶5

versus

¶6

DELHI TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, Adv. for Resp-1 Mr. Avinash Detha, proxy for Ms. Swaty Singh Malik, Advocate for Resp-2.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA

¶8

¶9

O R D E R 01.04.2016

¶10

The appeal is directed against an order of 30.03.2016. It is contended that the order has the effect of virtually rendering the main relief claimed in the writ petition infructuous.

¶11

At the outset, this Court notices that the order - against which the appeal is sought to be filed - has not finally decided the rights of the parties. Arguably, it could be said that the date fixed might result in prejudice, however, that does not ipso facto entitle this Court to exercise the limited jurisdiction in Letters Patent Appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant requests that in these circumstances liberty be granted to move the learned Single Judge with an application for

¶12

early hearing and disposal of the interlocutory application and the writ petition, having regard to the subject matter and the likely hardship.

¶13

Counsel for the respondents/University which is the employer has no objection and states that in case such an application is moved, there would be no opposition for early hearing.

¶14

In the circumstances, the appellant is at liberty to apply for expedited and early hearing of the writ petition and the interlocutory application.

¶15

In the light of the above liberty, counsel seeks permission to withdraw the appeal; LPA 220/2016 is dismissed as withdrawn, along with all the pending applications.

¶16

A copy of this order be given dasti under the signatures of Courtmaster.

¶17

S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J

¶18

DEEPA SHARMA, J

¶19

APRIL 01, 2016 / vikas /

Dr Pushpendra Singh v. Delhi Technological University & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr Pushpendra Singh v. Delhi Technological University & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Veena Mahajan Vs Shri v N Verma & Ors.

Mohit Panwar & Ors. Vs Airports Authority of India

Abhay Sharma & Ors. Vs Airports Authority of India Thr Its Chairman

Government of NCT of Delhi Vs Annamma Em & Ors.

Nikhil Maheshwari & Ors. Vs Airports Authority of India

Subeer Sarkar Vs Airports Authority of India