JOHN DAYAL AND ANR. Vs. UOI AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner seeks deletion of petitioner no. 2 from the array of parties. This request is not opposed. Accordingly, petitioner no. 2 is deleted from the array of parties. Mr. Saqib, who appears for respondent nos. 1 and 3 and Mr. Moonis, who appears for respondent no. 2, say that they do not wish to file a reply and are quite happy to argue the matter based on the record available with the court. The learned counsels, however, seek to rely upon a clarificatory circular which was issued on 26.03.2013, post the hearing in the captioned writ petition on the said date.

(2.) WITH the request of counsels, the petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal.

(3.) THE petitioner approached this court by way of the present writ petition challenging the said circular, inter alia, on the ground that it violated Article 25 of the Constitution of India. On the very first date i.e., 26.03.2013, this court issued certain interim directions, the relevant part of which is extracted hereinbelow: -