A three-judge bench of the High Court of Delhi dismissed a writ petition adjudged withdrawn by the petitioners without commenting on the merits of the case.
Writ petition dismissed as withdrawn without commenting on merits.
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.
$~FB2
UOI & ANR. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr.Arun Bhardwaj, CGSC for UOI with Mr.Ajay Raj Singh Chauhan, SO (SPG) & Ms.Parveeta Dhawan, ADG (SPG), Under Secretary, Dept. of Posts
versus
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms.Jyoti Singh, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Padma Kumar, Mr.Himanshu Gautam, Mr.Amandeep Joshi, Mr.Amit Gupta, Ms.Mansi, Advs. for R4/Ms.Anju Nigam Mr.R.L. Dhawan, Mr.R.K. Sarkar, Advs. for private respondents
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
O R D E R % 09.03.2018
Counsel for the petitioner/Union of India, on instructions, states that he wants to withdraw the writ petition. Counsel for Ms. Anju Nigam and counsel for Mr.Rajinder Kumar Kashyap and two other private respondents state that they have no objection. This statement on behalf of Ms.Anju Nigam and Mr.Rajinder Kumar Kashyap and two other private respondents is made without prejudice to their rights and contentions in W.P.(C) No.2464/2000.
Page 1 of 2
W.P.(C) 123/2003
Recording the aforesaid, writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn without commenting on merits.
SANJIV KHANNA, J
S. MURALIDHAR, J.
HIMA KOHLI, J.
MARCH 09, 2018 pk
W.P.(C) 123/2003
Page 2 of 2
UOI & ANR.
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL & ORS.
SANJIV KHANNA
S. MURALIDHAR
HIMA KOHLI
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
