Appeals against a single judge order were arisen; counsel sought permission to withdraw appeals to argue before the single judge, and appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.
Both appeals were dismissed as withdrawn.
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.
$~20 & 21.
Versus
DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF TRAINING ..... Respondent
Versus
DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF TRAINING (DGT) ..... Respondent
Present :- Mr.Sanjay Sherawat, Adv. for the appellants. Ms.Meera Bhatia, Adv. for UOI.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO
O R D E R
% 02.11.2016
C.M.No.40654/2016 (exemptions) in LPA 600/2016 C.M.No.40656/2016 (exemptions) in LPA 601/2016
Allowed subject to all just exceptions.
LPAs No.600/2016 & 601/2016
These two appeals are directed against a common order passed by the learned Single Judge pending W.P.(C) Nos.9711/2016 & 9444/2016.
Having regard to the fact that the said writ petitions now stand listed on 07.11.2016, the learned counsel for the appellants seeks permission to withdraw the appeals with liberty to urge all the grounds raised in the present appeals before the learned Single Judge.
LPAs No.600/2016 & 601/2016
Page 1 of 2
Accordingly, both the appeals are dismissed as withdrawn.
CHIEF JUSTICE
NOVEMBER 02, 2016/ ‘anb’
V. KAMESWAR RAO, J
LPAs No.600/2016 & 601/2016
Page 2 of 2
KALAM PRIVATE ITI & ORS
DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF TRAINING
SAMRAT ASHOK PRIVATE ITI
DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF TRAINING (DGT)
V. KAMESWAR RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
