Delhi High Court - Orders
Vineeth Pareek vs Directorate General Of Civil Aviation on 27 January, 2026
Author: Sachin Datta
Bench: Sachin Datta
$~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
ORDER
% 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 This is a digitally signed order.
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 29/01/2026 at 20:36:15 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 This is a digitally signed order.
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 29/01/2026 at 20:36:15