Permission to withdraw a petition - disposal as withdrawn - condonation of delay - no prejudice to other pending or future petitionsPermission to withdraw a petition - disposal as withdrawn - no prejudice to other pending or future petitions - Prayer for withdrawal of Writ Petition W.P.(Crl.)No.61/2015 granted and petition disposed of as withdrawn with clarification. - HELD THAT: - Learned counsel for the petitioner sought and was granted permission to withdraw the writ petition. The Court allowed the withdrawal and disposed of W.P.(Crl.)No.61/2015 as withdrawn. The Court expressly clarified that this withdrawal shall not operate as a bar or prejudice against any other writ petition already pending or which the petitioner may file in future.Permission to withdraw W.P.(Crl.)No.61/2015 granted; petition disposed of as withdrawn; withdrawal will not affect other writ petitions pending or to be filed.Condonation of delay - permission to withdraw a petition - disposal as withdrawn - Delay in SLP(Crl.) was condoned and Special Leave Petition was permitted to be withdrawn and disposed of as withdrawn. - HELD THAT: - The Court, on application, condoned the delay in filing the Special Leave Petition. Subsequently, on instructions, learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the SLP, which the Court granted. The Special Leave Petition was accordingly disposed of as withdrawn.Delay in filing SLP condoned; permission to withdraw SLP granted; SLP disposed of as withdrawn.Final Conclusion: The Court granted permission to withdraw the writ petition and the Special Leave Petition (with delay in the SLP condoned) and disposed of both petitions as withdrawn; the withdrawal of the writ petition was clarified not to prejudice any other writ petition pending or to be filed by the petitioner.

Alternative remedy - Abstention from exercise of discretionary jurisdiction - Remand to tribunal for independent considerationAlternative remedy - Abstention from exercise of discretionary jurisdiction - Dismissal of Special Leave Petitions on the ground that petitioners have an alternative remedy and are before the Tribunal. - HELD THAT: - The Court noted that the petitioners had already adopted the alternative remedy and were before the Tribunal. In light of the availability and invocation of that remedy, the Court declined to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under the Special Leave Petition procedure to entertain the petitions. No adjudication was made on the merits of the issues raised in the petitions; the refusal to entertain was founded on the procedural posture of the case and the existence of an alternative forum for relief.Special Leave Petitions dismissed for want of jurisdiction to entertain while an alternative remedy is available.Remand to tribunal for independent consideration - Disposition of substantive issues raised in the petitions left open for determination by the Tribunal. - HELD THAT: - The Court expressly kept all issues raised in the Special Leave Petitions open and directed that the Tribunal decide them independently and in accordance with law. This constitutes a remand of the controversies to the tribunal for fresh and independent consideration, without the Supreme Court passing on their merits.All issues reserved and remitted to the Tribunal for independent adjudication in accordance with law.Final Conclusion: The Special Leave Petitions are dismissed because the petitioners have an alternative remedy and are before the Tribunal; the substantive issues raised are left open and remitted to the Tribunal for independent decision in accordance with law.