The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn by the petitioners, who stated there is no current complaint of harassment. An application for interim stay was also dismissed.
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
RAJ KUMAR MISHRA & ANR ..... Petitioners
Through Mr. Sanjay Baniwal, proxy counsel for Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate.
versus
SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS .
.... Respondents Through Mr. Roshan Lal Goel, Standing Counsel with Ms. Anju Gupta, Adv. for SDMC. Mr. Prabhsahay Kaur & Ms. Aakanksha Badkur, Advocate for R-2 & R-3.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL
O R D E R % 06.03.2018
Counsel for the petitioners submits that he has instructions to withdraw this writ petition as there is no complaint of harassment at present. Counsel further submits that in case any harassment is caused by the officials of the respondents to the petitioners in future, the petitioners would approach this Court again.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty as prayed.
CM APPL 5996/2018 also stands dismissed.
G.S.SISTANI, J
SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J
MARCH 06, 2018/ ck/
Raj Kumar Mishra & Anr
South Delhi Municipal Corporation
G.S. Sistani
Sangita Dhingra Sehgal
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
