1. Learned counsel for the petitioners has filed an application for withdrawal of the writ petition with liberty to approach the Court as and when fresh cause of action accrues in their favour. Learned counsel for the private respondents submit ted at the Bar that he is averse to the withdrawal and further submitted that liberty prayed for by the petitioners may not be granted, and, thus, vehemently objected to the said course. Learned counsel for the private respondents was pointedly asked to show the rule or law which debars any person from seeking withdrawal of a writ petition, which he failed to show. 2. To put the record straight and in its right perspective, it may be summarized that the petitioners have sought writ of certiorari for quashing the impugned advertisement notice forming annexure T to the writ petition and have also sought writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to modify the advertisement notice in question and re-advertise the same on the basis of habitation in terms of the SSA Scheme, on the grounds taken in the memo of writ petition. 3. In response to the notice of the Court, the respondents 7 to 9 have appeared and filed their objections. However, the official respondents have yet to file the same. 4. The present application seeking withdrawal of the writ petition with liberty to file a fresh one has been filed in terms of Section 23 (3) of Code of Civil Procedure. In paragraph 2 thereof, it is stated that during the pendency of the writ petition, the official respondents have assured the petitioners that their grievances would be redressed and, accordingly, they have sought withdrawal of the writ petition with liberty aforementioned. Moreover, it is seen from the record that the respondents 7 to 9 have filed an application seeking vacation of the ad interim direction, which, according to them, runs against their interests. The natural consequence of the acceptance of the prayer of the petitioners for withdrawal of the writ petition would be automatic vacation of the ad interim direction, and such a course would subserve the interests of the respondents as well, inasmuch as their prayer for vacation of ad interim direction would be met, too.
The natural consequence of the acceptance of the prayer of the petitioners for withdrawal of the writ petition would be automatic vacation of the ad interim direction, and such a course would subserve the interests of the respondents as well, inasmuch as their prayer for vacation of ad interim direction would be met, too. In that view of the matter, the resistance to the prayer of the petitioners shown by the private respondents contradicts their own stand in the CMP for vacation of the ad interim direction, besides being unreason able and unsustainable. 5. It needs a mention here that in terms of the Rehbar-e-Taleem Scheme governing the engagement/selection of RET teachers, the concerned respondent, competent authority has to prepare the tentative selection list and seek objections thereto from the persons who are aggrieved within the time frame and, after making the select list, the same procedure has to be followed/adop ted. Thus, what emerges is that if any party/person is aggrieved of the same, he can approach the respondents by registering his grievance. 6. It appears that the petitioners have approached the official respondents, as stated by them in paragraph 2 of the motion at hand. In that view of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that Order XXIII Rule 3 of Code of Civil Procedure is attracted, moreso when the counsel appearing for the petitioners is under instruc tions to withdraw the writ petition. The Court, in such circumstances, cannot thrust upon the petitioners to pursue their writ petition. 7. Accordingly, the application of the petitioners is allowed. Writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn along with all connected CMPs with liberty to file a fresh one, provided fresh cause accrues. Interim direction shall stand vacated.