The writ petition was disposed of on the ground that the petitioner had expired, rendering the petition incompetent and incapable of proceeding further.
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.
$~5
MANJU SACHDEVA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Prashant Bhardwaj, Mr. Anuraj Tirthankar & Mr. Shaurya Dogra, Advs.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Ripu Daman Bhardwaj, CGSC with Mr. T.P. Singh, Adv. for R-1 & R-2 Mr. Parvinder Chauhan, Standing Counsel with Mr. Nitin Jain, Adv. for DUSIB
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR
O R D E R % 05.02.2020
Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has expired and this writ petition may be disposed of as such.
In view of this submission, this writ petition along with pending application is hereby dismissed as it has become incompetent and cannot proceed further.
CHIEF JUSTICE
C.HARI SHANKAR, J
FEBRUARY 05, 2020/ns
MANJU SACHDEVA
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
