@ LHI (- OF DELHI AT NEW DE ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, Adv. Versus THE COMMANDING OFFICER & ORS. ....' Respondents Through: Ms. Jyoti Singh, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Tinu Bajwa, Adv. AND ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, Adv. Versus COMMANDING OFFICER & ORS ""' Respondents Through: Ms. Jyoti Singh, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Tinu Bajwa, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW ORDER 29.08.201t CM No.12664i2011 in W.P.(O No.15182/2006 & CM No.12670/2011 in \ LP{C) No.2416l2007 (both for restoration of the writ petitions dismissed in default on 5'n August. 2011) The senior counsel for the respondents has appeared on advance notice and has on instructions fairly stated that the respondents have no objection to restoration of the writ petitions. The writ petitions are accordingly restored to their original position. The applications are disposed of. t/2 80&82$- * IN THE HIGH COURT + w.P.(c) 1sr8212006 SANJU DEVI + w.P.(c) 241612007 MITI-IILESH SINGH oh I. Signing Date:06.09.2024 17:17:58 Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified J w.P.(o 1s182/2006 & w.P.(O 241,6/2007 1. The senior counsel for the respondents has reiterated what was stated on 5'r' August, 20II i.e. that the reliefs claimed in the petition stand satisfied. 2. The counsel for the petitioners however invites attention to the order dated 25tl' May, 2011 where the respondents were directed to inform whether any disciplinary action had.been taken against the officers involved in accident. 3. The senior counsel for the respondents states that a Board of Enquiry was held and which found none responsible therefor and the accident to be purely accidental and as such no disciplinary action has been taken against anyone. 4. 'fhe counsel for the petitioners states that the copy of the report of the Board of Enquiry has not been supplied and a decision has been taken not to supply the same. 5. Be that as it may, the decision having already been taken by the petitioners and the respondents having taken steps for preventing such accidents in future, no further orders are needed in the writ petitions. The petitions are disposed of. No order as to costs. IV SAHAI ENDLAW. J AUGUST 29,2O1I 'gsr' E 2/2