← Library
High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/8087/2019

Vineeth Pareek v. Directorate General Of Civil Aviation

2026-01-27Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Sachin Datta2 pages

$~33 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 8087/2019 VINEETH PAREEK .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Anurag Atulya, Mr. Gagan Preet Singh and Mr.

Vikas Pathak, Advocates.

versus DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF CIVIL AVIATION .....Respondent Through:

Mrs. Anjana Gosain, Ms. Shreya Manjari and Ms. Akansha Choudhary, Advocates for DGCA.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA

O R D E R

% 27.01.2026 1.

Vide order dated 17.09.2025, it was ordered as under:- "1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. Vide order dated 21.05.2025, the following directions were passed: "4. Considering that the medical opinion relied on by both the parties was given about 6 years back, it would be appropriate to direct the petitioner to undergo fresh examination by DGMS, AHQ/competent authority within a period of eight weeks from today and the report be placed on record."

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the latter could not appear for the said examination on account of the fact that he is in Bangalore.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent submits that the petitioner will have to approach the office of DGMS for the fresh examination Let the petitioner do the needful within 6 weeks.

5. As and when the petitioner approaches DGMS, the respondent shall comply with the directions in order dated 21.05.2025 in accordance with The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/01/2026 at 13:31:47

law.

6. List on 27.01.2026."

2.

It is informed by the learned counsel for the petitioner today that the petitioner is not desirous of / unable to approach the DGMS for the purpose of 'Keratoconus' examination.

3.

It is submitted that this position persists despite repeated attempts made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 4.

It is evident that the petitioner is not desirous of prosecuting the present petition. In the circumstances, the same is dismissed. SACHIN DATTA, J JANUARY 27, 2026/r The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/01/2026 at 13:31:47