Delhi High Court - Orders
Dr. Rashi Satyanarayan Soni & Ors vs Union Of India & Ors on 31 May, 2022
Author: Sanjeev Narula
Bench: Sanjeev Narula
$~120 & 127
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 7615/2022
DR. RASHI SATYANARAYAN SONI & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Apoorve Karol, Ms. Mithu Jain
and Mr. Lakshay Sharma, Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Ms. Nidhi Raman (SPC) alongwith
Ms. Seema Singh (GP) and Mr. Zubin
Singh, Advocate for R-1/UOI.
Sh. T. Singhdev, Mr. Michelle B.
Dass and Mr. Abhijit Chakravorty,
Advocates for R-2.
Mr. Kirtiman Singh, Advocate for
DNB.
Mr. Satvik Varma, Sr. Advocate
alongwith Mr. Manish Dhir and Ms.
Drishti Harpalavi, Advocates for R-4
+ W.P.(C) 5328/2021 & CM APPLs. 16403/2021, 16786/2022,
19269/2022
DR. SHINDE MAHESH PRAKASH & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Apoorve Karol, Ms. Mithu Jain
and Mr. Lakshay Sharma, Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. T. P. Singh, Sr. Central
Government Counsel for R-1/UOI.
Sh. T. Singhdev, Ms. Michelle B.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 5328/2021 and connected matter Page 1 of 4
By:SAPNA SETHI
Signing Date:01.06.2022
20:48:00
Dass and Mr. Abhijit Chakravorty,
Advocates for R-2.
Mr. Kirtiman Singh, Advocate for
DNB.
Mr. Satvik Varma, Sr. Advocate
alongwith Mr. Manish Dhir and Ms.
Drishti Harpalavi, Advocates for R-4.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
ORDER
% 31.05.2022 CM APPL. 16786/2022 (on behalf of Petitioners seeking leave to place on record Additional documents) in W.P.(C) 5328/2021.
1. This is an application seeking leave to file additional documents under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 [hereinafter, "the Act"].
2. The Plaintiff, if they wish to file additional documents at a later stage, shall do so strictly as per the provisions of the said Act.
3. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
C.M. No. 16403/2022 (on behalf of Petitioners seeking stay of the provisions of Clause 4.3.2 of the Information bulletin dated 19.01.2021 issued by the Respondent No. 3 till the pendency of the petition), & CM APPL. 19269/2022 (on behalf of Petitioner No. 11 seeking stay of letter dated 28.03.2022 issued by the Respondent No. 3/NBE cancelling the candidature for DrNB training of Petitioner No. 11) in W.P.(C) 5328/2021.
4. Finding a prima facie view in favour of the Petitioner, vide interim Order dated 21st April, 2022, Petitioners were permitted to fill up the forms for appearing in the forthcoming for DNB (Final) Examination to be conducted by the Respondent No. 3. This permission was subject to the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 5328/2021 and connected matter Page 2 of 4 By:SAPNA SETHI Signing Date:01.06.2022 20:48:00 outcome of the present writ petition.
5. This order was assailed by the National Board of Examinations in LPA 348/2022, wherein the Division Bench of this Court, while entertaining the appeal, has stayed the impugned order vide order dated 24th May, 2022, in the following terms:
"(...) List for consideration on 09.11.2022.
In the meantime, the operation of the impugned judgment is stayed. We are informed that the Writ Petition itself is listed before Learned Single Judge on 30.05.2022. The pendency of this appeal shall not come in the way of the hearing of the said Writ Petition. We request the Learned Single Judge to hear the matter either on 30.05.2022, if possible or at the earliest convenient date. The writ petition shall be decided without being influenced by this order."
6. In light of the said stay granted by the Division bench, there cannot be any question of granting an interim relief to the Petitioners today.
7. On 30th May, 2022, in both the petitions, this Court directed the parties to file brief note of the submissions to understand the scope of the present proceedings, and to estimate the time required for concluding the hearing. The said submissions have been received and perused. This matter would certainly require considerable time to adjudicate.
8. That apart, the Court has queried from the counsel for the Petitioner regarding the timelines for making submissions. Mr. Apoorve Karol, counsel for the Petitioner, states that he will endeavour to complete his submissions in 45 minutes. Mr. Kirtiman Singh, counsel for National Board of Examination, states that he would also take another 30-35 minutes. Mr. Satvik Varma, Senior Counsel for Respondent No. 4, states that he will take Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 5328/2021 and connected matter Page 3 of 4 By:SAPNA SETHI Signing Date:01.06.2022 20:48:00 15 minutes to argue. Further Ms. Michelle B. Dass, counsel for Respondent No. 2 (National Medication Commission), states that she will take 25 minutes to argue. Ms. Seema Singh, counsel for UOI, states that she would take another 15-20 minutes.
9. Considering the above and keeping the position of the board in mind, it is not possible to take up petitions immediately and accordingly, the same would be taken up on the earliest possible date.
10. Renotify on 19th July, 2022.
SANJEEV NARULA, J MAY 31, 2022 sb Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 5328/2021 and connected matter Page 4 of 4 By:SAPNA SETHI Signing Date:01.06.2022 20:48:00