* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) No.7408/2010
% Date of Decision: 16.03.2011
Sh.Pranay Sinha & Ors. ...... Petitioners
Through Mr. V.K. Rao, Sr. Advocate with Mr. S.K.
Pandey,
Versus
Union of India & Ors. ...... Respondents
Through Ms. Jyoti Singh, Sr. Advocate with Mr.
Dinesh Yadav, Advocate for respondent
No. 2
Mr.Naresh Kaushik and Ms. Anita Kalkal
Choudhary, Advocates for UPSC
Mr. J.P. Sengh, Sr. Advocate with Mr.
Sumit Batra, Mr.Saurabh Chadha & Ms.
Nidhi Gupta, Advocates for respondent
Nos. 4 to 11
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL
1. Whether reporters of Local papers may be NO
allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the reporter or not? NO
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in NO
the Digest?
ANIL KUMAR, J.
* After some arguments learned counsel for the petitioners wants to rely on certain documents, which were not filed before the Tribunal, some of which have been filed in the writ petition along with an application for taking additional documents on record. W.P.(C) 7408/2010 Page 1 of 2
Since these documents were not considered by the Tribunal, the learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, seeks to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to approach the Tribunal and impugned the order of the Tribunal on the basis of these documents, which were not filed earlier, by seeking review of impugned order dated 30th September, 2010.
In the circumstances, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.
However, the interim order granted by this Court shall continue for 15 days, whereafter the Tribunal will decide whether the petitioner shall be entitled for interim order or not on the basis of the merits of the case.
All the pending applications are also disposed of.
ANIL KUMAR, J.
MARCH 16, 2011 VEENA BIRBAL, J.
rs
W.P.(C) 7408/2010 Page 2 of 2