DEEPAK RAJ SON OF SHRI GIRIRAJ PRASAD JI GUPTA v. SHARMA CRICKET CLUB
CW/19354/2022 · 2025-01-27
Sudesh Bansal
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 33878 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 33878 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:3769] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19354/2022
1. Deepak Raj Son Of Shri Giriraj Prasad Ji Gupta, Aged About 43 Years, Secretary Of District Cricket Association Sawai Madhopur, Resident Of Ward No. 21, Station Road, Gangapur City, Sawai Madhopur (Raj.).
2. District Cricket Association Sawai Madhopur, Having Address At Opposite Senior Girls School, Station Road, Gangapur City, Sawai Madhopur Through Its Secretary Deepak Raj ----Petitioners Versus
1. Sharma Cricket Club, Through Its Secretary Ravi Kumar, Resident Of Bank Colony, Gangapur City, Sawai Madhopur.
2. Dr. Sumit Garg Son Of Dr. S.C. Garg, Aged About 44 Years, Resident Of Garg Hospital And Research Center, Near Bhairu Darwaja, Sawai Madhopur.
3. Mr. Sunit Arora (Former IAS Retd., Former Chief Election Commisioner Of India), Electoral Officer Of Rajasthan Cricket Association.
4. Rajasthan Cricket Association, SMS Stadium, North Block, RCA Academy, Jaipur Through Its Hony. Secretary. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Dr. Abhinav Sharma through VC For Respondent(s) : Ms. Priyanka Tiwari for Mr. Prateek Kasliwal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL
Order 27/01/2025
1. Instant writ petition has been filed by petitioners seeking to quash the order dated 07.11.2022 passed by the District Sawai Madhopur and to record the name of petitioner No.1 to represent the petitioner No.2 District Cricket Association, Sawai Madhopur in the record of Rajasthan Cricket Association.
2.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner, having instructions from the petitioner, states that with passage of time,
[2025:RJ-JP:3769] (2 of 2) [CW-19354/2022] petitioners are not willing to pursue the writ petition and seeks permission to withdraw this writ petition.
3. Counsel for respondents has no objection to the same.
4. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
5. Stay application and any other pending application, if any, stand disposed of.
(SUDESH BANSAL),J NITIN /350