* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.8314/2010 &
CM NOs.10127/11, 21383/2010
Date of Decision: August 11, 2011
P.S. BAHL ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Shanker Raju, Advocate.
versus
GOVT. OF NCT. OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. M. L. Sharma, Advocate
For Respondent No.5.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA
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)
1. After some arguments, learned counsel for the
petitioner on instructions from the petitioner, who is present, seeks
to withdraw the petition with liberty to approach the Tribunal to
seek review of impugned order dated 1st December, 2010 with
regard to his plea that the original application of the respondent
No.5 was barred by time, as the said plea was taken as preliminary
objection and was also canvassed before the Tribunal. However,
the Tribunal had not decided the same.
2. The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the
liberty as prayed for, without prejudice to the other grounds and
WP(C) No.8314/2010 Page 1 of 2
contentions raised by the petitioner in the writ petition which will be
open for challenge.
3. The interim order granted by this Court by order dated
14th December, 2010, and any relief availed by the petitioner on
account of interim order, however, shall continue for another four
weeks. For period after four weeks, it will be open to the petitioner
to approach the Tribunal for continuation of interim order and any
relief availed by him, in accordance with law.
4. Dasti.
ANIL KUMAR, J.
SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J.
AUGUST 11, 2011
dr
WP(C) No.8314/2010 Page 2 of 2