Petitioner sought leave to withdraw a writ petition challenging a Central Act where the Union of India was not impleaded. The court granted leave and liberty to file appropriate proceedings, subsequently dismissing the petition as withdrawn.
Leave and liberty granted to withdraw and file appropriate proceedings.
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.
$~26
versus
GOVERNMENT OF DELHI NCT OF DELHI & ORS
..... Respondents
Through Mr. Ramesh Singh, Standing Counsel with Mr. Shadan Farasat, Additional Standing Counsel along with Mr. Chirayu Jain and Mr. Ahmed Said, Advocates
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA O R D E R
% 15.05.2018
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw this petition, in view of the circumstance that although it challenges the vires of a Central Act, the Union of India has not been arrayed a party thereunder.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, however, prays that liberty be granted to file an appropriate proceeding, in accordance with law.
Leave and liberty granted.
The petition is dismissed as withdrawn and disposed of
accordingly.
Pending applications also stand disposed of.
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J
DEEPA SHARMA, J
MAY 15, 2018 as
Sushil Kumar Singh
Government of Delhi
NCT of Delhi
Siddharth Mridul
Deepa Sharma
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
