Petitioner State of Haryana submitted that the writ petition had become infructuous; the court disposed of the petition and pending applications as infructuous, directing parties to bear their own costs.
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.
$~45
STATE OF HARYANA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Samar Vijay Singh, Adv.
versus
DELHI INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT AND ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Anita Sahani, Adv. for R-2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA
O R D E R % 06.03.2025
Learned counsel for the petitioner on instructions states that the present petition has become infructuous and therefore, it may be disposed of.
In view of the submissions made above, the petition along with pending applications stands disposed of as being infructuous.
Parties are directed to bear their own costs.
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J
MARCH 6, 2025 Pallavi/KR
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 10/03/2025 at 12:26:13
State of Haryana
Delhi Institute of Technology and Management
Dinesh Kumar Sharma
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
