The High Court of Delhi dismissed a writ petition when the petitioner's counsel moved to withdraw the proceedings due to inability to obtain instructions from one of the petitioners.
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.
$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 7555/2002 SUPRITI BISHWAS & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr.Vivek Singh, Adv. versus UOI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA O R D E R % 02.05.2018
Mr.Vivek Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he is unable to obtain instructions from petitioner No.2 to the effect that the present proceedings have been rendered infructuous. Mr.Singh, therefore, seeks leave to withdraw the present petition.
The petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J
DEEPA SHARMA, J
MAY 02, 2018 neelam
Supriti Bishwas & Ors.
UOI & Ors.
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
