Yog Raj v. Union Of India And ANR

$-24 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 2562/2017 & CM Nos.11083-84/2017 YOG RAJ Petitioner Through:

Mr. Anish Agarwal & Mr. Avi Tandon, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR Respondents Through:

Ms. Saroj Bidawat, Advocate for respondent No.

I Mr.

Naresh Kaushik & Ms.

Shriambhra, Advocates for UPSC

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

ORDER

% 21.03.2017 Learned counsel for the respondent/UPSC, who appears on advance notice, submits that this writ petition is not maintainable, in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in L. Chand Kumar v. Union of India, 1997

(2) SCR 1186. The petitioner is questioning the selection/recruitment process and also the vires of the age requirements, as stipulated in the Examination Notice No.06/20I7-CSP dated 22.2.2017 and Regulation 4 of the Indian Administrative Service (Appointment by Competitive Examination), Regulation, 1995.

By:AMULYA

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner states that he would like to withdraw the present writ petition and approach the Tribunal. The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty as prayed for, without expressing any opinion on merits.

SANJIV KHANNA, J GRANDER SHEKHAR, J MARCH 21, 2017 tp