Disposed

Rishanlang Syiemlieh & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi HC22 Aug 2024W.P.(C)/10618/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court disposed of the writ petition directing respondents to treat the petition as a representation. The Court ordered respondents to pass a reasoned and speaking order on grievances within 12 weeks without expressing an opinion on merits. Petitioners may seek further legal recourse if aggrieved.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to treat the writ petition as a representation and decide grievances within 12 weeks by passing a reasoned and speaking order.

Rishanlang Syiemlieh & Anr. Vs Union of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~3

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 10618/2024

¶4

RISHANLANG SYIEMLIEH & ANR.

¶5

.....Petitioners

¶6

Through: Mr. Anupam Kumar Mishra, Adv.

¶7

versus

¶8

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

¶9

.....Respondents Through: Dr. Ramaswami, CGSC with Mr. Amit Acharya, Govt. Pleader.

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINDER KAUR

¶11

O R D E R % 22.08.2024

¶12

CM APPL. 43644/2024 –Ex .

¶13

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶14

The application stands disposed of.

¶15

W.P.(C) 10618/2024

¶16

The petitioners have approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:

¶17

“1. Issue the writ of Mandamus thereby directing the Respondents to pass orders/direct the Respondent No.3 to stop the firing and bombing practice with immediate affect and/or;

¶18

2. Issue the writ of Mandamus thereby directing the Respondents to pass orders/direct the Respondent No.3 to

¶19

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/08/2024 at 11:52:02

¶20

relocate the Firing range away from the current place to a vacant area where there are no residents nearby.”

¶21

After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that for the present the petitioners would be satisfied in case the respondents were to treat the present writ petition as their representation and pass a reasoned and speaking order thereon.

¶22

Issue notice. Learned counsel for the respondents accepts notice and does not oppose this limited prayer.

¶23

In the light of the aforesaid stand taken by the parties, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to treat the present writ petition as a representation by the petitioners and decide the grievances raised therein by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 12 weeks.

¶24

Needless to state, since this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claims made by the petitioners, in case they are aggrieved by any order passed by the respondents, it will be open for them to seek legal recourse, as permissible in law.

¶25

REKHA PALLI, J

¶26

SHALINDER KAUR, J

¶27

AUGUST 22, 2024 acm

¶28

This is a digitally signed order.

¶29

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/08/2024 at 11:52:02

Rishanlang Syiemlieh & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rishanlang Syiemlieh & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Mj Bizcrafts LLP (through Its Partner Sh. Rajender Kumar) Vs Central Goods and Services Tax, Delhi South Commissionerate (through Its Commissioner) & Ors.

Rajesh Adhikari and Ors. Vs Sashastra Seema Bal and Anr.

Kunal Khatumaria Vs State (Gnct of Delhi) and Ors.

Shri Nath Kushwaha & Ors. Vs Braham Swaroop Sharma & Ors.

Prayag Polytech Private Limited & Anr. Vs Canara Bank

Central Government Welfare Housing Organization Cgewho Vs Inder Jit Singh Ahuja

Mohd. Rashid Vs Union of India & Anr.

Anil Kumar Sinha and Ors. Vs North Delhi Municipal Corporation

Rajesh Adhikari and Ors. Vs Sashastra Seema Bal and Anr.

Manish Kumar Vs Union of India and Ors.

Comdt. Anand Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

Sachin Kumar Vs Union of India and Ors.

Palyam Delhi Prasad Vs Union of India and Ors.

Ms. Poorva Mehra Vs the Registrar General, Honble High Court of Delhi & Anr.