M/S. HIMALAYAN FLORA AND AROMAS PVT. LTD. v. SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

Delhi High Court · 26 Aug 2016 · 2016:DHC:8764
Indermeet Kaur
W.P.(C) 5914/2015
2016:DHC:8764
administrative appeal_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court allowed withdrawal of petitions challenging earlier orders with liberty to file fresh petitions against new orders, while continuing the status quo order for three weeks.

Full Text
Translation output
ir $-20 to 23 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(C) 5914/2015, C.M. No.10704-05/1016 & C.M. No.14807/2015
M/S. HIMALAYAN FLORA AND AROMAS PVT. LTD. i Petitioner
Through Mr. Anand Mishra and Mr. Hemant Kumar, Advs.
VERSUS
SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION (SDMC)
Respondent
Through Mr. Mukesh Gupta, standingcounsel.
W.P.(C) 5916/2015 & C.M. Nos.10709-10/2015
M/S ANANT ARTS
VERSUS
SDMC
Through Mr. Mukesh Gupta, standing counsel.
W.P.(C) 5917/2015 & C.M. Nos.10712-13/2015 & 14803/2015
M/S. HINDUSTAN PUBLICITY PVT. LTD.
VERSUS
Through Mr. Mukesh Gupta, standing cotmsel.
W.P.(C) 5919/2015 & C.M. Nos.10717-18/2015 & 14803/2015 ;
M/S. OUTDOOR COMMUNICATIONS P. LTD.
Kumar, Advs. j 2016:DHC:8764
VERSUS
Through Mr. Mukesh Gupta, standing counsel.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR
26.08.2016 After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw these petitions in view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent that fi^esh orderhas beenpassedby the Competent Authority/respondent.
These petitions are dismissedas withdrawn with liberty granted to the petitioner to approach this Court and impugn the fresh order which has been passed and which is known to the petitioner. The petitioner informs this Court that a status quo order was operating in his favour in these matters and this order should enure in his favour till the next three weeks by which time the petitionerproposes to file a fi-esh petition. Orderedaccordingly.
<•
Dismissed as withdrawn.
INDERMEET KAUR, J AUGUST 26,2016 A 2016:DHC:8764
JUDGMENT