Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

K.D. Khera vs Union Of India on 23 September, 2016

Bench: Chief Justice, A.M. Khanwilkar, D.Y. Chandrachud

                                                                                     1

     ITEM NO.5                          COURT NO.1               SECTION PIL(W)
                               S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
                                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
                                Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No.225/2015

     K.D. KHERA                                                      Petitioner(s)

                                                 VERSUS

     UNION OF INDIA AND ORS                            Respondent(s)
     (with appln. (s) for ad-interim ex-parte stay and exemption from
     filing O.T. and intervention and placing addl. documents on record
     and office report)
     WITH
     W.P.(C) No. 445/2015
     (With appln.(s) for impleadment and appln.(s) for stay and appln.
     (s) for impleadment and Office Report)

     W.P.(C) No. 553/2015
     With appln. for permission to file additional documents and appln.
     (s) for ex-parte stay and Office Report)
     I.A. NO.6/2016 in W.P.(C) No.225/2015
     (application for intervention)

     Date : 23/09/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today.
     CORAM :
                         HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR
                         HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD
     For Petitioner(s)
                                     Mr. Devvrat, Adv.

                                    Mr.   K.K. Venugopal, Sr. Adv.
                                    Mr.   Sandeep S. Ladda, Adv.
                                    Mr.   Soumik Ghosal, Adv.
                                    Mr.   Devender Singh, Adv.
                                    Ms.   Rashmi Nandakumar, Adv.
     For Respondent(s)
                                    Mr. Ranjit Kumar, SG
     (Union of India)               Mr. V. Mohana, Sr. Adv.
                                    Ms. Binu Tamta, Adv.
                                    Mr. T.M. Singh, Adv.
                                    Mr. P.K. Mullik, Adv.
Signature Not Verified
                                    Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Adv.
                                    Mr. B.K. Prasad, Adv.
Digitally signed by
ASHOK RAJ SINGH
Date: 2016.09.24
12:33:45 IST
Reason:


                                    Mr.   Rajesh Kumar, Adv.
                                    Mr.   Gaurav Kumar Singh, Adv.
                                    Mr.   Rakesh Chaurasiya, Adv.
                                    Mr.   Anant Gautam, Adv.
                                    M/s   Mitter & Mitter Co.
                                                                  2

                    Mr. Rajat Arora, Adv.
                    Ms. Ritu Arora, Adv.
                    Mr. Anuvrat Sharma, Adv.

                    Mr. Kuldeep S. Parihar, Adv.
                    Mr. H.S.Parihar, Adv.

(For applicant)     Mr. Gopal Jain, Sr. Adv.
                    Ms. Pragya Baghel, Adv.
                    Ms. Samten Doma, Adv.

(For applicant)     Mr. Pradeep Aggarwal, Adv.
                    Mrs. Suchitra Roy Saha, Adv.

                    Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, Adv.
                    Mr. Dushyant Kumar, Adv.
                    Mr. Rabin Majumder, Adv.

                    Ms. Praveena Gautam, Adv.
                    Mr. Deepak Tyagi, Adv.

                    Mr. M.T. George, Adv.

                     Mr. Naveen R. Nath, Adv.

                     M/s Mitter & Mitter Co.

          UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                             O R D E R

Heard.

We are not inclined to entertain these writ petitions in exercise of our powers under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.

The writ petitions are accordingly dismissed.

Pending applications, if any, are also disposed off.

This order, however, shall not prevent any person otherwise eligible for appointment as Managing Director or Chief Executive Officer in terms of the relevant scheme and the advertisement(s) issued or anyone who is aggrieved of such appointment from questioning that appointment in appropriate proceedings before appropriate forum in accordance with law.

      (Ashok Raj Singh)                        (Veena Khera)
        Court Master                           Court Master