The petitioner waived the writ petition and the stay application was disposed of as not pressed. The exemption application was allowed subject to conditions.
Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions; Writ petition and stay application disposed of as not pressed.
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.
$~4
RAKESH KUMAR LAKRA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Karan Thakur, Mr. Shubham Singh & Mr. Chirag Ananad, Advs.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Rohan Anand, Adv. Mr. Kirtiman Singh, CGSC for UOI. Mr. Satyakam, ASC, GNCTD for R-2 & 3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR
O R D E R % 12.02.2020
CM APPL. 48524/2019 (exemption)
Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 11841/2019 & CM APPL. 48523/2019 (stay)
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, on instructions, states that he is not pressing this writ petition at this stage.
In view of this submission, the present writ petition is disposed of as not pressed at this stage. The pending application also stands disposed of accordingly.
CHIEF JUSTICE
FEBRUARY 12, 2020/kks
C.HARI SHANKAR, J
Rakesh Kumar Lakra
Union of India
C. Hari Shankar
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
