The High Court of Delhi disposed of the writ petition and pending application as the underlying writ petition became infructuous because the movement order was kept in abeyance pending the disposal of a statutory representation.
Disposal of the writ petition and the pending application.
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.
$~16
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
HAVILDAR SAJI RAJ R ..... Petitioner Through Major K. Ramesh, Advocate
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr. Ankur Chhibber, Advocate
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHAWLA O R D E R % 02.03.2017
Mr. Ankur Chhibber, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, submits on instructions, that the movement order has been kept in abeyance till the disposal of the statutory representation of the petitioner, as directed by this Court.
This writ petition has thus become infructuous and no orders need be passed thereon.
The writ petition is disposed of. Pending application also stands disposed of.
INDIRA BANERJEE, J
ANIL KUMAR CHAWLA, J
MARCH 02, 2017/sd
Saji Raj R
Union of India
Indira Banerjee
Anil Kumar Chawla
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
