Full Text
Translation output
a9 ii $-R-2 HIGH COURT OF DELHI w.P.(c) 226U2007
TEH ACTION COM. OF IIN.AIDED PV..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Pramod Gupta, Adv.
TEH ACTION COM. OF IIN.AIDED PV..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Pramod Gupta, Adv.
VERSUS
DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AND ORS..... Respondent
Through: Ms. Avnish Ahlawat with Mr. Nitesh Singh, Advs. For Director of
Education
Through: Ms. Avnish Ahlawat with Mr. Nitesh Singh, Advs. For Director of
Education
CORAMi , HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN
ORDER o 20.02.2013 This peiition questions the notification issued by the Director of
School Education and for some other reliefs. In W.p.(C) No.759912007, we have passed the following order:
"This petition questions the order/notification of Director of School Education dated 25.1.2007. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submiued that the said order/notification dated 25.1.2007 has been superseded and a subsequent notification/ order dated
7.1.201I has been issued pursuant to RTE Act, 2009 and the same has come into forc6 and in that sense the writ petition has become infructuous. However, the learned t
2013:DHC:6758-DB t-r )
AL t counsel has submiued that the dismissal of the writ petition should not stand in the way of the petitioner to work out their remedy as regards to the subsequent notification dated 7.1.2011. The learned counsel has submitted that insofar as the other reliefs sought for in this petition are concerned, same can also be sought in appropriate proceedings.
In view of the said submissions, the petition is dismissed."
The issue raised in this petition and the reliefs sought for are similar as to the issue raised in the above writ petition. Hence, this petition is disposed of on the basis of same order.
FEBRUARY 20, 2OI3 rd r v/.K. JAIN, J 2013:DHC:6758-DB
ORDER o 20.02.2013 This peiition questions the notification issued by the Director of
School Education and for some other reliefs. In W.p.(C) No.759912007, we have passed the following order:
"This petition questions the order/notification of Director of School Education dated 25.1.2007. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submiued that the said order/notification dated 25.1.2007 has been superseded and a subsequent notification/ order dated
7.1.201I has been issued pursuant to RTE Act, 2009 and the same has come into forc6 and in that sense the writ petition has become infructuous. However, the learned t
2013:DHC:6758-DB t-r )
AL t counsel has submiued that the dismissal of the writ petition should not stand in the way of the petitioner to work out their remedy as regards to the subsequent notification dated 7.1.2011. The learned counsel has submitted that insofar as the other reliefs sought for in this petition are concerned, same can also be sought in appropriate proceedings.
In view of the said submissions, the petition is dismissed."
The issue raised in this petition and the reliefs sought for are similar as to the issue raised in the above writ petition. Hence, this petition is disposed of on the basis of same order.
FEBRUARY 20, 2OI3 rd r v/.K. JAIN, J 2013:DHC:6758-DB
JUDGMENT