Kanishk Ahuja v. District And Session Judge (South) & ORS.

$~47 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 8941/2017 KANISHK AHUJA ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr Sumit Bansal and Mr Ateev Mathur, Advocates.

versus DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE (SOUTH) & ORS.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr D. Rajeshwar Rao, Advoctes for R-1 & 2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R

% 11.10.2017 CM No.36569/2017 1.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

W.P.(C) 8941/2017 & CM No.36568/2017 2.

The petitioner is aggrieved as the petitioner claims that he does not feature in the list of candidates considered eligible for allotment of chambers in a Lawyers' Chamber in Saket Court Complex. 3.

It is the petitioner's case that he had filed an application on 20.08.2014 for allotment of a chamber in Saket Court Complex. According to the petitioner, he is entitled to allotment of a chamber in accordance with the Rules and Regulations framed in this regard. Since the petitioner's name did not feature in the list of eligible candidates which were published on 18.09.2017, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 20.09.2017.

However, the petitioner has received no response to his representation and has consequently filed the present petition.

4.

The learned counsel for the respondent who appears on advance notice states that the petitioner's representation is under consideration. 5.

In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of by directing respondent nos.1 & 2 to consider the petitioner's representation as expeditiously and preferably within a period of eight weeks from today and communicate their decision to the petitioner. 6.

The petition is disposed of with the aforesaid direction. 7.

Order dasti.

VIBHU BAKHRU, J OCTOBER 11, 2017 MK