Mr. C.S.S. Pillai, Advocate. v. UOI & ORS. ..

Delhi High Court · 26 Aug 2011 · 2011:DHC:4370-DB
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR; HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA
WP(C) No.8636/2010 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
2011:DHC:4370-DB
constitutional petition_allowed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition with respondent's consent and dismissed the connected application as infructuous.

Full Text
Translation output
WP(C) No.8636/2010 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.8636/2010
Date of Decision: August 26, 2011 ASHOK KASHYAP ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. C.S.S. Pillai, Advocate.
VERSUS
UOI & ORS. ….. Respondents
Through: Ms. Charu Ambwani, Advocate for Mr. Prashant Kumar, Advocate
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA
JUDGMENT

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No

2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? No

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? No ANIL KUMAR, J. (ORAL) CM APPL. NO. 12510/2011 IN W.P.(C) NO. 8636/2010 This is an application by the petitioner seeking withdrawal of the writ petition. The application is supported by the affidavit of the petitioner. An advance copy of the application has been given to counsel for the respondent. Learned counsel for the respondent, on instructions, states that the respondent has no objection to the petitioner withdrawing the writ petition. 2011:DHC:4370-DB WP(C) No.8636/2010 Consequently, the application is allowed and the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the writ petition. W.P.(C) NO. 8636/2010 At the request of the petitioner, writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. CM APPL. NO. 21974/2010 IN W.P.(C) NO. 8636/2010 In view of the order passed in the main writ petition, this application does not survive and the same is dismissed as infructuous. ANIL KUMAR, J. SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J. AUGUST 26, 2011 rd