Single judge order addressing lack of territorial jurisdiction in a writ petition by Central Silk Board employees. Petition allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to file in competent court.
Petition allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to file in competent court of territorial jurisdiction.
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.
$~6
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
BHAGIRATH & ORS ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Bijan Ghosh, Advocate.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Dev Bhardwaj, Advocate for R-1. Mr. Ankur S. Kulkarni, Advocate for R-2.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J. MEHTA
O R D E R % 09.03.2017
page 1 of 2
W.P.(C) 2565/2016
course, petitioners in accordance with law will be entitled to the benefit of the principle contained in Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 with respect to appropriate independent proceedings which will be filed in the competent court.
VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J
MARCH 09, 2017
AK
page 2 of 2
W.P.(C) 2565/2016
Bhagirath & Ors
Union of India
Central Silk Board
Valmiki J. Mehta
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
