Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Ravindra Kumar Gupta (Dead) Thr. Lrs. vs State Of Up on 16 August, 2021
Bench: D.Y. Chandrachud, M.R. Shah
SLP(C) 14579-14580/2017
1
ITEM NO.34 Court 4 (Video Conferencing) SECTION XI
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) Nos.14579-14580/2017
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 25-01-2017
in RP No.826/2014 30-10-2014 in WP No.180/2012 passed by the High
Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench)
RAVINDRA KUMAR GUPTA (DEAD) Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF UP & ORS. Respondent(s)
Date : 16-08-2021 These petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sudeep Seth, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Anurag Kishore, AOR
Ms. Somna Dhown, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Ajay Vikram Singh, AOR
Mrs. Priyanka Singh, Adv.
Mr. Chandra Shekhar, Adv.
Mr. P.S. Patwalia, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Rajat Singh, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Pratap, AOR
Ms. Harshika Verma, Adv.
Mr. Samarth Mohanty, Adv.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
Chetan Kumar
Date: 2021.08.23
17:28:12 IST
Reason:
SLP(C) 14579-14580/2017
2
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1 The petitioner died on 16 April 2021. The application for substitution of the legal representatives of the deceased petitioner is allowed. Amendment to be carried out within one week.
2 The petitioner instituted a suit for the recovery of damages. The basis for the claim was that the petitioner was suspended on two occasions and the orders of suspension were followed by disciplinary enquiries in which he was eventually exonerated. The trial court rejected the plaint on 13 February 2009, while allowing the application filed by the state under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The review was dismissed, and eventually the writ petition was also dismissed by the High Court on 31 August 2009. There was no further challenge to the order of the High Court.
3 The petitioner then instituted proceedings before the UP Public Services Tribunal which dismissed the Claim Petition on 23 February 2011. The writ petition instituted by the petitioner was dismissed by the High Court and the review was dismissed. This is how the proceedings eventually travelled to this Court.
4 We have heard Mr Sudeep Seth, senior counsel appearing on behalf of the LRs of the original petitioner, Mr P S Patwalia, senior counsel for respondent No 3 and Mr Ajay Vikram Singh, counsel for the State of Uttar Pradesh.
5 Mr Sudeep Seth has sought instructions from the legal representatives of the original petitioner and stated that they would not be in a position to pursue the claim before the civil court, particularly having regard to the fact that with the death of the original petitioner, the facts which were personal to his knowledge, would not be within the contemplation of the legal SLP(C) 14579-14580/2017 3 representatives.
6 Having due regard to the nature of the claim, it is not necessary to pursue these proceedings any further and in view of the instructions which have been made available to the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the proceedings would have to be closed.
7 The Special Leave Petitions shall accordingly stand disposed of.
8 Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(CHETAN KUMAR) (ANITA RANI AHUJA)
A.R.-cum-P.S. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR