The petitioner sought to withdraw the writ petition. The High Court of Delhi allowed the withdrawal and dismissed the present petition as withdrawn. The pending application stands disposed of.
The petition is dismissed as withdrawn and the pending application is disposed of.
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.
$~7
CONCEPT PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sharad Gupta & Mr. Vinayak Gupta, Advocates
versus
UNION OF INDIA ..... Respondent Through: Mrs. Suparna Srivastava, Ms. Nehul Sharma & Mr. Tushar Mathur, Advocates for UOI
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU O R D E R % 06.08.2018
VIBHU BAKHRU, J
AUGUST 06, 2018 rd
Concept Pharmaceuticals Limited
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
