Petitioners sought withdrawal of their writ petition with liberty to pursue other remedies. The court disposed of the petition as withdrawn, leaving rights and contentions open, and continued the interim order for four weeks.
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.
$~21
MADAN LAL AND ORS. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Trilok Nath Saxena, Mr. Aakash Shanker, Mr. Abhinav Saxena, Mr. V.K. Singh, Advs.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondent Through: Ms Kanika Agnihotri, ASC DDA with Mr. Sachin Sharma, Mr. Himaghn Jain, Advs. Mr. Niraj Kumar, Standing Counsel, with Mr. Chaitanya Kumar, Adv. Mr Rajesh Kumar, Ms. Mishika, Mr. Changz Ali Khan, Adv for UOI.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV O R D E R
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J.
SEPTEMBER 3, 2024/KG
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 06/09/2024 at 15:36:09
Madan Lal and Ors.
Union of India and Ors.
Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav
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
