Petitioner sought pre-mature retirement. The petitioner's counsel admitted the petition had become infructuous as the retirement prayer was accepted. The court dismissed the writ petition as not pressed.
Writ petition dismissed as not pressed; pending application 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.
$~24
DIGAMBAR SINGH ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Rajiv Manglik, Advocate.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr. Ravi Prakash, CGSC along with Mr. Farman Ali and Mr. Sankalp Jain, Advocates for respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHAWLA
O R D E R % 01.02.2017
Mr. Manglik submits that the writ petition has become infructuous as the prayer of the petitioner for pre-mature retirement has been accepted.
The writ petition is dismissed as not pressed. Pending application shall stand disposed of.
INDIRA BANERJEE, J
ANIL KUMAR CHAWLA, J
FEBRUARY 01, 2017 rs
Digambar Singh
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
