Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Mahesh Kumar Agrawal vs Union Of India on 17 November, 2020
Bench: Uday Umesh Lalit, Vineet Saran, S. Ravindra Bhat
1
ITEM NO.7 Court 3 (Video Conferencing) SECTION X
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(s). 536/2020
MAHESH KUMAR AGRAWAL Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s)
(IA No. 52870/2020 - PERMISSION TO APPEAR AND ARGUE IN PERSON)
Date : 17-11-2020 These matters were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT
For Petitioner(s) Petitioner-in-person
For Respondent(s)
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Permission to appear and argue in person is granted. SLP(C) NO.24223 of 2018 was disposed of this Court on 27.08.2018 with following observations:
“Delay condoned.
We notice that the High Court in the impugned order was pleased to observe that the petitioner was inflicted with minor penalty and on that basis the punishment of stoppage of two increments respectively for a period of one year with cumulative effective was imposed on him.
We are inclined to agree with the observation of the High Court.
We, therefore, do not find any good ground to interfere Signature Not Verified with the said order.Digitally signed by Dr. Mukesh Nasa Date: 2020.11.20 14:28:24 IST Reason:
The Special leave petition is accordingly dismissed.
Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.” 2 Said order was modified by subsequent order dated 29.08.2018 to the following effect:
“In our order dated 27th August, 2018, the word “with” was wrongly mentioned in place of word “without” after the word for a period of one year.
Accordingly, the word “with” shall now be read as “without” as stated above.” The present writ petition has now been filed seeking appropriate orders directing the Disciplinary Authority to withdraw the major penalty proceedings initiated under Rule 9 of the Indian Railway Disciplinary and Appeal Rule, 1968. The orders passed by this Court are self-explanatory. We therefore, refuse to entertain this petition. The writ petition is disposed of.
Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
(INDU MARWAH) (BEENA JOLLY) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)