Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Janki Sihote vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 March, 2016
1
W.P. Nos.8738/2012, 14127/2012, 17771/2012, 2748/2013,
545/2014, 13408/2014, 17768/2014, 6879/2015, 9043/2015,
15880/2015, 96/2016, 2570/2016
11.3.2016
W.P. No.96/2016
Shri Rajendra Tiwari, Senior Counsel with Shri R. K.
Tripathi, counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Swapnil Ganguli, Govt. Advocate for the
respondents/State.
I.A. No.2009/2016, application for vacating stay. Counsel for the respondents/State in support of the relief claimed in this application relies on the averments in Paragraph No.11 of the reply affidavit filed to oppose the writ petition.
That is not the reason stated in the subject application for vacating the stay.
Realizing this position, counsel for the respondents/State submits that the application under consideration be allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to file fresh application for appropriate reliefs.
Accordingly, this application is allowed to be withdrawn with liberty as prayed.
We make it clear that we are not expressing any opinion on the correctness of the abovesaid contention. If the State fails to take out such application within two weeks from today, we may proceed to admit the writ petition on the next 2 date of hearing.
Accordingly, list writ petition on 12.4.2016.
(A. M. Khanwilkar) (Sanjay Yadav)
Chief Justice Judge
Anchal