Full Text
Translation output
$-24 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(C)2562/2017&CM Nos.11083-84/2017
YOG RAJ Petitioner
Through: Mr. Anish Agarwal & Mr. Avi Tandon,Advocates
W.P.(C)2562/2017&CM Nos.11083-84/2017
YOG RAJ Petitioner
Through: Mr. Anish Agarwal & Mr. Avi Tandon,Advocates
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR Respondents
Through: Ms. Saroj Bidawat, Advocate for respondent No.I
Mr. Naresh Kaushik & Ms. Shriambhra,Advocates for UPSC
Through: Ms. Saroj Bidawat, Advocate for respondent No.I
Mr. Naresh Kaushik & Ms. Shriambhra,Advocates for UPSC
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR
21.03.2017 Learned counsel for the respondent/UPSC, who appears on advance notice, submits that this writ petition is not maintainable, in view of the decision ofthe Supreme Court in L. ChandKumar v. Union ofIndia,1997
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR
21.03.2017 Learned counsel for the respondent/UPSC, who appears on advance notice, submits that this writ petition is not maintainable, in view of the decision ofthe Supreme Court in L. ChandKumar v. Union ofIndia,1997
ORDER
(2) SCR 1186. The petitioner is questioning the selection/recruitment process and also the vires of the age requirements, as stipulated in the Examination Notice No.06/20I7-CSP dated 22.2.2017 and Regulation 4 of the Indian Administrative Service (Appointment by Competitive Examination),Regulation,1995. 2017:DHC:8187-DB At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner states that he would like to withdraw the present writ petition and approach the Tribunal. The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn,with liberty as prayed for, without expressing any opinion on merits.
MARCH 21,2017 tp SANJIV KHANNA,J GRANDER SHEKHAR,J