Angad Singh v. Union of India

Delhi High Court · 08 Aug 2019 · 2019:DHC:7514
Vibhu Bakhru
W.P.(C)11010/2018
2019:DHC:7514
administrative appeal_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court held that a Union of India Advisory is not binding on States and Union Territories and dismissed petitions challenging it as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh petitions against subsequent Circulars.

Full Text
Translation output
m M' $-27 &28 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(C)11010/2018 and CM APPL.42855/2018
ANGAD SINGH
UNION OFINDIA
Th I. dated ..... Petitioner
Through; MrNikhilRohatgi,Advocate,
VERSUS
.....Respondent
Through: Ms Moiuka Ajora, CGSC witih Mr Harsh Ahuja ^d Mr Kusha;l Kumar, Advocates for UOr.
AND
W.P.fCI11063/2018and CM APPL.43^^ SUNANDAN TANEJA ....;Petitioner
Through: Mr NikhilRohatgi,Advocate;
VERSUS
UNION OFINDIA ..... Respondent
Through: Ms Monika Arora, CGSC with Mr Harsh "Ahuja and Mr Kushat Kumar, Advocates for UOI.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE VlBHU BAKHltU
P8i08.2019 The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning an Advisory
28.08.2018. f
ORDER

2. Tt is pointed out that the question whether the said notificatioh was binding on various State Governments was considefed by this Court in Flush Ahluwalia v. Union ofIndia: W.F. (C)12163/20i[8] decided on 14.11.2018.li washeld thatthe said Advisoiy is notbinding and it would be open to the respective States and Union Tefritories to take an infpfmed 2019:DHC:7514 ■X. A decisioninthis regard.

3. In this view, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the present petition with,liberty to file afresh to challenge fhe subsequeht Circular issued by the respondents, which this Court is infonned is'subjectniatter ofpetitioners^pendingbefore this Court.

4. The petitions atid the applications are dismissed as vvithdravra, with the aforesaidliberty.

AUGUST 08,2019 RK VIBHUBAKHRU,J