On July 20, 2017, the Delhi High Court dismissed W.P.(C) 888/2017 as withdrawn upon the petitioner's counsel stating that a vakalatnama was filed on record.
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.
$~17
M/S HYTHRO POWER CORPORATION LTD ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Raunak Nayak, Advocate
versus
THE RECOVERY OFFICER EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Keshav Mohan, Advocate
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA
O R D E R % 20.07.2017
It is submitted by Mr.Raunak Nayak, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, that the petition is sought to be withdrawn.
In view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that he has filed his vakalatnama on record, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
ANU MALHOTRA, J
JULY 20, 2017/sv
M/S Hythro Power Corporation Ltd
The Recovery Officer Employees Provident Fund Organization
Anu Malhotra
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
