Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Versus
…..Respondent
11. That the present writ is being filed against arbitrary and
unreasonable action of the respondents. Further there is
no inordinate delay or laches in filling the present writ
petition.
12. That the petitioners are not left with any other efficacious
order or direction.
13. That the petitioner has not filed any other petition before
PRAYER
It is therefore most respectfully prayed that in view of the
facts and circumstances mentioned above, this Hon’ble
Court may kindly be pleased to:
New Delhi
Dated:- 26.09.2017 Sulaiman Mohd Khan
Advocate
Office:- A-446(LGF), Defence Colony
New Delhi-24
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Versus
NOTICE OF MOTION
To,
Standing Counsel,
New Delhi.
Sir,
sincerely,
New Delhi
Dated:-
____.09.2017 Sulaiman Mohd Khan
Advocate
Office:- A-446(LGF), Defence Colony
New Delhi-24
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Versus
INDEX
6. Annexure 'A'
8. Annexure-C
Annexure-D
Annexure-E-(Colly)
Annexure-F
Annexure-G-(Colly)
Annexure-H
Annexure-I-(Colly)
17. Vakalatnama
FILED BY :
New Delhi
Versus
To,
The Registrar,
New Delhi.
URGENT APPLICATION
Sir,
New Delhi
Versus
MEMO OF PARTIES
1. MUKESH YADAV
TEHSIL DADRI
U.P. ….Petitioner
Versus
1. UNION OF INDIA
THROUGH
MINISTRY OF YOUTH AFFAIRS & SPORTS
NIRMAN BHAVAN
NEW DELHI … Respondent No.1
New Delhi
Versus
and parcel of this application and the same are not being
Court.
New Delhi
Versus
are not stayed, the petitioner’s son years of hard work may
PRAYER
New Delhi