Shahshi Rani v. UOI & Ors (W.P.(C) 12004/2009)

Court: High Court of Delhi
Decided: 9 November 2012
Bench: Sanjay Lashan Icauuauthor
Case no.: W.P.(C) 12004/2009

Official PDF Read full judgment Report an error

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +

W.P.(C) 6781/2008 & CM No. 17498/2012 RAVINDER KUMAR MITTAL & ORS. Petitioners Through : Mr. D. Ghosh, Adv. for Ms. Nandni Sahni, Adv. for the Petitioners. versus UOI & ORS. Through : Mr. Sanjay Poddar, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Sanjay Pathak, Ms. Navlin Swain & Mr. Govind Kumar, Advs. for L&B. Ms. Sangeeta Chandra, Adv. for DDA. +

W.P.(C) 6782/2008 & CM No. 17686/2012 ROPIIT RAJ CHHABRA & ORS. .....Petitioners Tlirough : Mr. D. Ghosh, Adv. for Ms. Nandni Sahni, Adv. for the Petitioners. versus UOI & ORS. Through : Mr. Neeraj Chaudhari, CGSC for UOI. Mr. Aruii Birbal, Advocate for GNCTD. Ms. Sangeeta Chandra, Adv. for DDA. +

W.P.(C) 11109/2009 & CM No.18385/2012 K.K. GUPTA & ORS. Petitioners Through : Ms. Reklia Palli & Ms. Punam Singh, Advs. versus JV.F. (C) No's. 6781-6782/2008 & connected matters % UOI & ORS. Through : Mr. Neeraj Chaudhari, CGSC for UOI. Mr. Arun Birbal, Adv. for GNCTD. + W.P.(C) 11583/2009 NARAIN KUMAR & SONS & ORS. Petitioner Through : Mr. D. Ghosh, Adv. for Ms. Nandni Sahni, Adv. for the Petitioners. versus UOI & ORS. Respondent Through : Ms. Reeta Kaul, Adv. for .the UOI. Mr. Sanjay Poddar, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak, Advocate for GNCTD. +

W.P.(C) 367/2010 MANGAT RAM Petitioner Thi-ough : Mr. Manoj Sharma, Adv. versus UOI & ORS. Through : Mr. Neeraj Chaudhari, CGSC for UOI. Mr. Ai'un Birbal, Adv. for GNCTD. Ms. Sangeeta Chandra, Adv. for DDA. +

W.P.(C) 2815/2010 SHBELA d|eV1 Petitioner Through : Mr. Manoj Shanna, Advocate. versus f'V.F. (C) Nos. 6781-6782/2008 & connected matters jT UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Through: Mr. Sanjay Poddar, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak, Advocate for GNCTD. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY laSHAN ICAUU HON'Bli.E MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI % ORDER

09.11.2012 The new policy has come into being. The cause of action is now stated to be the grievance qua this policy. We may notice that the prayers made earlier in this writ petitions were to notify a rehabilitation policy. In view of the aforesaid learned counsels for the petitioners seek to withdraw the writ petitions and the applications with'liberty to challenge the new policy in accordance with law. Liberty granted. Dismissed as withdrawn. SANJAY KISHAN K^kUL, J. NOVEMBER 09, 2012 b 'nesh

VIPIN SANGHI, J. W.P. (C) Nos. 6781-6782/2008 & connected matters

Source: High Court of Delhi, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.