Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Manbodhan Awasthi vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh Thr. ... on 10 November, 2014
Bench: T.S. Thakur, Adarsh Kumar Goel, R. Banumathi
1
ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.2 SECTION XI
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
I.A. 3 & 4 in Civil Appeal No(s). 11338/2013
MANBODHAN AWASTHI Appellant(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF U.P.TR.SEC.FIN.& ORS. Respondent(s)
(for directions and exemption from filing O.T. and office report)
Date: 10/11/2014 These applications were called on for hearing
today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI
For Appellant(s) Mr. Sudhir Kulshreshtha,Adv.
Ms. Sushma Singh,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Prafulla Kr. Behera,Adv.
Mr. Rakesh Kr. Tewari,Adv.
Mr. Kshitij Chopra,Adv.
Mr. S. S. Nehra,Adv.
Mr. Vinay Garg,Adv.
Mr. Tanmay Agarwal,Adv.
Mr. Upendra Mishra,Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Heard.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that during the pendency of this appeal, respondent no.5 has not only been promoted to a higher post but he is posted as the appellant's Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Mahabir Singh Date: 2014.12.19 immediate superior in the office where both of them are presently 15:12:14 IST Reason:
working. He further states that the said respondent is likely to 2 damage the appellant's career by giving him adverse remarks/reports, as the ACRs of the appellant may also be written by the said respondent. There is no averment to that effect in the applications filed by the appellant. Learned counsel for the appellant prays for and is granted four weeks to file an additional affidavit stating the facts in this regard. Post after needful is done.
(MAHABIR SINGH) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER