Central Administrative Tribunal - Jodhpur
Unknown vs Mr. Pravej Moyal on 26 September, 2016
Notes of the registry Orders of the Tribunal MA No.230/2016 with MA No.266/2016 in OA No.53/2015 Date of Order : 26.09.2016 Mr. Pravej Moyal, counsel for applicant.
Mr. Dhirendra Pandey, proxy counsel for Mr. Kamal Dave, counsel for respondents.
MA No.230/2016 & MA No.266/2016 MA No.230/2016 has been filed by the applicant for restoration of OA No.53/2015, which was dismissed in default vide order dated 02.08.2016. MA No.266/2016 has been filed by the applicant for early listing of MA No.230/2016. Issue notice. Counsel for the respondents accepts the notice and submits that he has no objection to the allowance of MA No. 230/2016. For the reasons stated in MA No.230/2016, the same is allowed. Order dated 02.08.2016 is recalled and the OA No.53/2015 is restored to its original number. The MA No.266/2016 for early listing of MA No.230/2016 has rendered infructuous as we have already decided the MA No.230/2016. OA No.53/2015 Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he will file rejoinder within two weeks. Admit. List the OA on 03.11.2016 for final hearing.
[PRAVEEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
CP No.16/2012 in OA No.135/2008
Date of Order : 26.09.2016
Mr. J.K. Mishra, counsel for applicant.
Mr. Sunil Bhandari, counsel for respondents.
Counsel for the respondents submitted that since the order passed by the Honble High Court of Rajasthan, in furtherance to the order passed by this Tribunal is not with him, therefore, he seeks a days time. Granted. List the case on 28.09.2016.
[PRAVEEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
CP No.17/2012 in OA No.136/2008
Date of Order : 26.09.2016
Mr. J.K. Mishra, counsel for applicant.
Mr. Sunil Bhandari, counsel for respondents.
Counsel for the respondents submitted that since the order passed by the Honble High Court of Rajasthan, in furtherance to the order passed by this Tribunal is not with him, therefore, he seeks a days time. Granted. List the case on 28.09.2016.
[PRAVEEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
CP No.20/2012 in OA No.141/2008
Date of Order : 26.09.2016
Mr. J.K. Mishra, counsel for applicant.
Mr. Sunil Bhandari, counsel for respondents.
Counsel for the respondents submitted that since the order passed by the Honble High Court of Rajasthan, in furtherance to the order passed by this Tribunal is not with him, therefore, he seeks a days time. Granted. List the case on 28.09.2016.
[PRAVEEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
CP No.66/2015 in OA No.140/2000
Date of Order : 26.09.2016
Mr. Himanshu Shrimali present for applicant.
Mr. Salil Trivedi, counsel for respondents.
Counsel for the respondents submitted that in furtherance to the order passed by this Tribunal on 10.02.2016, the respondents have granted all the relevant benefits as reflected in the their compliance affidavit. He, therefore, submits that the present contempt petition has become infructuous. We have gone through the order passed by this Tribunal and the affidavit filed by the respondents. It is found that the respondents have complied with the order dated 01.02.2016 passed in OA No.140/2000. We are in agreement with the submissions made at the hands of the counsel for the respondents that the present contempt petition has become infructuous. Accordingly, the CP is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. Notices issued to the respondents are discharged.
[PRAVEEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
CP No.59/2016 in OA No.262/2013
Date of Order : 26.09.2016
Mr. Vijay Mehta, present for applicant.
Heard. Counsel for the applicant submits that the directions as contained in para No.2 &3 of the order passed in O.A No. 262/2013, have not been implemented by the respondents No.1.&2. Issue notice to the respondents No.1 & 2 at this stage.
List the case on 08.12.2016.
[PRAVEEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
OA No.241/2016
Date of Order : 26.09.2016
Mr. J.K. Mishra, present, for applicant.
Mr. Salil Trivedi, proxy counsel for Mr. Vinay Chhipa, counsel for respondents.
As prayed for, two weeks time is granted to the respondents to file reply. List the case on 07.12.2016.
[PRAVEEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
OA No.69/2012
Date of Order : 26.09.2016
Mr. S.K. Malik, present, for applicant.
Mr. K.S. Yadav, counsel for respondents.
Arguments heard.
Orders reserved.
[PRAVEEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
OA No.126/2012
Date of Order : 26.09.2016
Mr. J.K.Mishra, present, for applicant.
Mr. Rameshwar Dave, counsel for respondents.
Arguments heard.
Orders reserved.
[PRAVEEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
OA No.188/2012
Date of Order : 26.09.2016
Mr.Himanshu Shrimali, present, for applicant.
Mr. Salil Trivedi, counsel for respondents.
On the request of the counsel for the applicant, the hearing of the matter is adjourned to 21.10.2016.
[PRAVEEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
OA No365/2012
Date of Order : 26.09.2016
Mr. J.K. Mishra, present, for applicant.
Mr. K.S. Yadav, counsel for respondents.
On joint request, the hearing of the matter is adjourned to 24.10.2016 for final hearing.
[PRAVEEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
OA No.389/2013
Date of Order : 26.09.2016
Mr. S.K. Malik, present, for applicant.
Mr. B.L. Tiwari, counsel for respondents.
Heard. The OA is disposed of. See separate order.
[PRAVEEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
OA No.503/2013
Date of Order : 26.09.2016
None present for applicant.
Mr. Salil Trivedi, counsel for respondents.
On the request of the counsel for the respondents, the hearing of the matter is deferred to 28.11.2016.
[PRAVEEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
OA No.509/2013
Date of Order : 26.09.2016
Mr. D.Pandey, present, on behalf of Mr. Kamal Dave, counsel for applicant. Mr. Rameshwar Dave, counsel for respondents.
As requested by the counsel for the applicant, the hearing of the matter is adjourned to 29.11.2016.
[PRAVEEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
OA No.562/2013
Date of Order : 26.09.2016
Mr. S.K. Malik, present, for applicant.
Mr. Girish Shankhala, counsel for respondents.
On the joint request, the hearing of the matter is deferred to 01.12.2016.
[PRAVEEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
OA No.566/2013
Date of Order : 26.09.2016
MS S. Rizvi, present, for applicant.
Mr. K.S. Yadav, counsel for respondents.
On the request of the counsel for the applicant, the hearing of the matter is adjourned to 20.10.2016.
[PRAVEEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
OA No.130/2014
Date of Order : 26.09.2016
Mr. S.K. Malik, present, on behalf of Mr. Vijay Mehta, counsel for applicant. Mr. Anirudh Purohit, proxy counsel for Mr. V.K. Mathur, counsel for respondents.
On the request of the counsel for the applicant, the hearing of the matter is adjourned to 02.12.2016.
[PRAVEEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
OA No.62/2015
Date of Order : 26.09.2016
Ms. S. Rizvi, present, for applicant.
Mr. K.S. Yadav, counsel for respondents.
On the request of the counsel for the applicant, the hearing of the matter is adjourned to 05.12.2016.
[PRAVEEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
OA No.230/2015
Date of Order : 26.09.2016
Mr. A.K. Kaushik, present, for applicant.
Mr. Sunil Bhandari, counsel for respondents No. 1 to 4.
Mr. Piyush, proxy counsel for Mr. Ravi Bhansali, counsel for respondent No.5.
Counsel for the applicant has prayed for further three weeks time to file rejoinder. Time granted. Three weeks' time is also granted to the respondent No.5 to file reply. List the case on 06.12.2016. IR to continue till then.
[PRAVEEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
OA No.290/00000/2016 (Dy. No.437/2016) Date of Order : 26.09.2016 None present for applicant.
The present Original Application was filed by the applicant in the Registry on 13.05.2016 and accordingly, the applicant was informed for removal of objections/defects. It is found that the applicant fails to remove the defects in the Registry and therefore the matter was listed before the Tribunal on 21.07.2016. On that day, the applicant was given two weeks' time to remove the defects as a last opportunity. It is seen that the applicant has not removed the objections/defects as pointed out by the Registry. Accordingly, the OA is dismissed as applicant is not removing the same.
[PRAVEEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
OA No.290/00000/2016 (Dy. No.438/2016) Date of Order : 26.09.2016 None present for applicant.
The present Original Application was filed by the applicant in the Registry on 13.05.2016 and accordingly, the applicant was informed for removal of objections/defects. It is found that the applicant fails to remove the defects in the Registry and therefore the matter was listed before the Tribunal on 21.07.2016. On that day, the applicant was given two weeks' time to remove the defects as a last opportunity. It is seen that the applicant has not removed the objections/defects as pointed out by the Registry. Accordingly, the OA is dismissed as applicant is not removing the same.
[PRAVEEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
OA No.290/00000/2016 (Dy. No.603/2016) Date of Order : 26.09.2016 Mr. A.K. Kaushik, present, for applicant.
Counsel for the applicant seeks one week's time to remove the objection(s) raised by the Registry. Time granted. List the case on 07.10.2016.
[PRAV EEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
MA No.290/00000/2016 (Dy. No.664/2016) in OA No.45/2011 Date of Order : 26.09.2016 Ms. Anjana Jawa, present on behalf of Mr. R.S. Saluja, counsel for applicant. .
Counsel for the applicant seeks one week's time to remove the objection(s) raised by the Registry. Time granted. List the case on 13.10.2016.
[PRAV EEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
OA No.382/2016
Date of Order : 26.09.2016
None present for applicant.
Mr. Gourav Thanvi, puts in his appearance on behalf of Mr. Avinash Acharya, counsel for respondents No.1 to 3.
Counsel for the respondents No.1 to 3 seeks four weeks' time to file reply. Time granted. List the matter on 06.12.2016 for awaiting service qua the respondent No.4.
[PRAV EEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
OA No.174/2013
Date of Order : 26.09.2016
Mr. Manoj Purohit, present, for applicant.
Ms. Anjana Jawa, counsel for respondents. + On the request of the counsel for the applicant, the hearing of the matter is adjourned to 28.11.2016.
[PRAV EEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
Notes of the registry
Orders of the Tribunal
OA No.422/2014
Date of Order : 26.09.2016
None present for applicant.
Mr. B.L. Bishnoi, counsel for respondents.
None is present on behalf of the applicant even on revised call.
Heard. Orders reserved.
[PRAV EEN MAHAJAN] [SANJEEV KAUSHIK]
Administrative Member Judicial Member
Rss
The present Original Application has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 against the impugned order dated 11.09.2013 (Annexure-A/1) passed by respondent No.3 wherein the applicant is ordered to be reverted from the post of Superintendent Group 'B' (Ad hoc) to Inspector on the ground that being the junior most and to adjust Shri Sunil Kumar Verma, the applicant is to be reverted. Shri S.K. Malik, counsel for the applicant vehemently argued that action of the respondents is arbitrary as the applicant is not the junior most person. He has drawn our attention to para 4.7 of the reply wherein the respondents have not categorically denied that they have admitted the fact that Shri S.C. Maich, who filed the OA No.131/2013 in which his reversion has been stayed by this Tribunal. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the Original Application No.131/2013 filed by Shri S.C. Maich was disposed of vide order dated 19.11.2013 with a direction that the respondents will consider and decide the representation of the applicant in respect of the extence of vacancies. He submitted that in pursuance of that directions, the respondents have considered the case of similar situated persons of the applicant. In view of the fact that the junior persons to the applicant has been promoted the case of the applicant is therefore should be considered. Shri B.L. Tiwar, counsel for the respondents submits that the respondents may be given thee months time to consider the case of the applicant. Considering the ad-idem between the parties, the OA is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the applicant for promotion to the post of Superintendent Group B from the date when junior persons to the applicant was given promotion. The respondent department shall conclude this exercise within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the applicant was found eligible for promotion, he may be granted the same from the date his similarly situated person was granted. Till the respondents take a view in the matter the impugned order be kept in abeyance. No order as to costs. ??
??
??
??
IN THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR ORDER SHEET APPLICATION No. of Applicant(s): Respondent(s) : Advocate for Applicant(s) : Respondent (s) :