Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Govt. Of Andhra Pradesh Thr. Principal ... vs Pratap Karan . on 21 April, 2016
Bench: Jagdish Singh Khehar, C. Nagappan
CHAMBER MATTER(5) SECTION XIIA
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
R.P.(C) No. 274/2016 In C.A. No. 2963/2013
GOVT. OF ANDHRA PRADESH THR. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND ORS.
Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
PRATAP KARAN AND ORS. Respondent(s)
(with office report)
WITH
R.P.(C) No. 1573/2016 In C.A. No. 2964/2013
(With (With appln.(s) for application for hearing in open court and
appln.(s) for c/delay in filing review petition and Office Report)
Date : 21/04/2016 These petitions were circulated today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. NAGAPPAN
By Circulation
UPON perusing papers the Court made the following
O R D E R
Delay of 36 days in the filing the Review Petition (C) No.1573 of 2016 is condoned.
Application for hearing in open court filed in Review Petition (C) No.1573 of 2016 is rejected.
The review petitions are dismissed.
(USHA BHARDWAJ) (MADHU NARULA)
AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER
Signed order is placed on the file. Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by USHA RANI BHARDWAJ Date: 2016.04.21 17:14:15 IST Reason: IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 274 OF 2016 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2963 OF 2013 Govt. of Andhra Pradesh through Principal Secretary & Ors. … Petitioners versus Pratap Karan & Ors. … Respondents WITH REVIEW PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 1573 OF 2016 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2964 OF 2013 Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Ltd. … Petitioner versus Pratap Karan & Ors. … Respondents O R D E R Delay of 36 days in the filing the Review Petition (C) No.1573 of 2016 is condoned.
Application for hearing in open court filed in Review Petition (C) No.1573 of 2016 is rejected.
The instant petitions have been filed by the petitioners seeking review of the judgment dated 9.10.2015 rendered by this Court in the above mentioned civil appeals.
We have carefully perused the petitions for review and the papers filed in support thereof. We do not find any error apparent on the face of record of this Court warranting reconsideration of the judgment impugned in the instant petitions. The review petitions are, accordingly, dismissed.
.………………..……………….…....…J. (Jagdish Singh Khehar) ………………...…………………….…J. (C. Nagappan) New Delhi;
April 21, 2016.