The High Court of Delhi disposed of a writ petition as infructuous because the extension of tenure to the respondent had expired. The matter was settled by consent without further adjudication.
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.
$~1
TUSHAR RANJAN MOHANTY ..... Petitioner Through: Petitioner in person.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.R.N.Singh, Advocate.
CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI
O R D E R % 04.04.2018
end in January, 2018. He, however, submits that the Tribunal has made certain observations in the impugned judgment with regard to the powers and functioning of the ACC under the Transaction of Business Rules which if left undecided, will come in his way in the fresh OA filed by him and pending consideration before the Tribunal.
HIMA KOHLI, J.
PRATIBHA RANI, J.
APRIL 04, 2018 „st‟
page 2 of 2
W.P.(C) 12221/2015
TUSHAR RANJAN MOHANTY
UNION OF INDIA
HIMA KOHLI
PRATIBHA RANI
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
