The petitioner's writ petition was withdrawn and the withdrawal application was allowed. The main petition was subsequently dismissed as withdrawn. No substantive legal issue was decided.
The application to withdraw the petition is allowed and the petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
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.
$~10
R. RAJEEV HUBERT ..... Petitioner Through: Mr Adarsh Upadhyay and Mr Vikas Chaudhary, Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr Bhagvan Swarup Shukla, CGSC with Mr Suraj Kumar, Advocate for UOI. Mr Ashok Kumar, Advocate for R-2.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU O R D E R
% 07.02.2018
CM No.4478/018
VIBHU BAKHRU, J
FEBRUARY 07, 2018 MK
R. Rajeev Hubert
Union of India
Vibhu Bakhru
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
