Karnataka High Court
The Union Of India vs Sri Nazeer Ahamed @ Nisar Ahmed on 25 July, 2012
Bench: N.K.Patil, S.N.Satyanarayana
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JULY, 2012,
: PRESENT :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.PATIL
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA
Writ Petition No.2873 of 2012 (S-CAT)
C/W. Writ Petition No.2874 of 2012 (S-CAT)
C/W. Writ Petition No.2875 of 2012 (S-CAT)
Writ Petition No.2873 of 2012
Between:
1. The Union of India,
Through the Secretary,
Ministry of Finance,
Department of Revenue,
North Road, New Delhi.
2. The Commissioner of Central Excise,
Belgaum, No.71, Mudalgi Building,
Club Road, Belgaum-590 009.
3. The Commissioner of Central Excise,
Bangalore I Commissionerate,
C.R. Building, Queens Road,
Bangalore-1.
4. The Additional Commissioner of Central
Excise(P & V),
Bangalore II Commissionerate,
C.R. Building, Queens Road,
2
Bangalore-1.
...Petitioners
(By Sri. H.Jayakara Shetty, Advocate)
And :
Sri. Nazeer Ahamed @ Nisar Ahmed,
S/o. Sri. Ghouse Mohidinsab,
Aged about 57 years,
Casual Labourer,
C/o. Assistant Commissioner of
Central Excise,
Davangere Division,
C.R. building, Devaraj Urs Layout,
C Block, Davanagere-6.
... Respondent
This W.P. is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India, praying to quash the order vide
Annexure-A dated 22/08/2008 made in Original Application
in O.A.No.51/2008 by the Central Administrative Tribunal,
Bangalore Bench, Bangalore.
Writ Petition No.2874 of 2012
Between:
1. The Union of India,
Through the Secretary,
Ministry of Finance,
Department of Revenue,
North Road, New Delhi.
2. The Commissioner of Central Excise,
Belgaum, No.71, Mudalgi Building,
Club Road, Belgaum-590 009.
3. The Commissioner of Central Excise,
Bangalore I Commissionerate,
3
C.R. Building, Queens Road,
Bangalore-1.
4. The Additional Commissioner of Central
Excise(P & V),
Bangalore II Commissionerate,
C.R. Building, Queens Road,
Bangalore-1.
...Petitioners
(By Sri. H.Jayakara Shetty, Advocate)
And :
Sri. S. Mehboob,
S/o. Sri. B.Budensab,
Aged about 53 years,
Casual Labourer,
O/o. Assistant Commissioner of
Central Excise,
Davangere Division,
C.R. building, Devaraj Urs Layout,
C Block, Davanagere-6.
... Respondent
This W.P. is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India, praying to quash the order vide
Annexure-A dated 22/08/2008 made in Original Application
in O.A.No.72/2008 by the Central Administrative Tribunal,
Bangalore Bench, Bangalore.
Writ Petition No.2875 of 2012
Between:
1. The Union of India,
Through the Secretary,
Ministry of Finance,
Department of Revenue,
North Road, New Delhi.
4
5. The Commissioner of Central Excise,
Belgaum, No.71, Mudalgi Building,
Club Road, Belgaum-590 009.
6. The Commissioner of Central Excise,
Bangalore I Commissionerate,
C.R. Building, Queens Road,
Bangalore-1.
7. The Additional Commissioner of Central
Excise(P & V),
Bangalore II Commissionerate,
C.R. Building, Queens Road,
Bangalore-1.
...Petitioners
(By Sri. H.Jayakara Shetty, Advocate)
And :
Smt. Huligamma,
W/o. Sri. Melappa,
Aged about 54 years,
Casual Labourer,
O/o. Assistant Commissioner of
Central Excise,
Davangere Division,
C.R. building, Devaraj Urs Layout,
C Block, Davanagere-6.
... Respondent
This W.P. is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India, praying to quash the order vide
Annexure-A dated 22/08/2008 made in Original Application
in O.A.No.71/2008 by the Central Administrative Tribunal,
Bangalore Bench, Bangalore.
These W.Ps. coming on for Orders, this day,
N.K.PATIL J., made the following:
5
:O R D E R:
Though these matters are posted today in orders list, for non- compliance of more than 9 objections raised by the Office, the office objections are dispensed with and the matters are taken up for consideration on merits.
2. The petitioners in these petitions have sought for quashing of the order dated 22/08/2008 made in Original Applications in O.A.Nos.51/2008, 72/2008 & 71/2008 respectively by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, Bangalore, vide Annexure-A in all these petitions.
3. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for petitioners and after careful perusal of the materials available on record, it emerges that, the applications filed by the applicants- respondents herein are allowed by the Tribunal with a direction to the respondents-petitioners herein to consider the case of the applicants on par with the judgment in O.A.Nos. 185 and 222/2003 which was challenged in Writ 6 Petition Nos. 20531-20532/2004 and the relief granted in those applications will be subject to the out come of the above said writ petitions. Now the aforesaid writ petition has been rejected by this Court on 24th February 2011, holding that both the respondents therein having completed the statutory period of 240 days, the question of interfering with the order passed by the Tribunal does not arise. If that is the case, these petitions filed by the petitioners are not justifiable. Therefore, we are of the considered view that, it would suffice for this Court to issue appropriate direction to the petitioners herein to comply the directions issued by the Central Administrative Tribunal, in the light of the observations made by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.20531/2004 disposed of on 24th February 2011.
With the above observations, these writ petitions are disposed of.
SD/-
JUDGE SD/-
JUDGE tsn*