Writ petition concerning relief recommended by the State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities; petitioners stated the respondent had been granted that relief, rendering the petition infructuous. The writ petition and pending applications were dismissed as withdrawn.
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.
$~6
THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE (HQS) AND ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, SC GNCTD with Ms. Aliza Alam and Mr. Mohnish Sehrawat, Advocates
versus
AVDHESH TIWARI .....Respondent
Through: None.
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN
O R D E R
% 15.10.2025
Ms. Aliza Alam, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits upon instructions, that the respondent has been granted the relief as recommended by the State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities, and that the writ petition has been rendered infructuous. She therefore seeks permission to withdraw the writ petition.
The writ petition, alongwith pending applications, is dismissed as withdrawn.
PRATEEK JALAN, J
OCTOBER 15, 2025 SS/KA/
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 17/10/2025 at 12:14:48
1 issue framed by the court
Should the writ petition be withdrawn as the respondent has been granted relief recommended by the State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities?
The District and Sessions Judge (HQS) and Anr.
Avdhesh Tiwari
Prateek Jalan
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
