Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi vs Manoj Kumar Bedwal on 6 August, 2021
Bench: D.Y. Chandrachud, M.R. Shah
1
ITEM NO.7 Court 5 (Video Conferencing) SECTION XIV
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).168/2021
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-01-2020
in WP(C) No. 7019/2019 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New
Delhi)
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
MANOJ KUMAR BEDWAL Respondent(s)
(WITH IA No.1331/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT)
WITH
SLP(C) Diary No(s). 25783/2020 (XIV)
(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.134049/2020-CONDONATION OF DELAY
IN FILING and IA No.134052/2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE
IMPUGNED JUDGMENT)
Date : 06-08-2021 These petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
For Petitioner(s) Ms. Madhvi Divan, ASG.
Mr. Piyush Beriwal, Adv.
Mr. Sridhar Potaraju, Adv.
Mr. Anukalp Jain, Adv.
Mr. B.V. Balram Das, AOR.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Devesh Pratap Singh, AOR
Mr. S.N. Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Aman Mudgal, Adv.
Mr. Anshuman Nayak, Adv.
Mr. Alok Kumar, Adv.
Mr. M. K. Bhardwaj, Adv.
Mr. Bano Deswal, Adv.
Signature Not Verified
Mr. Amit Sahni, Adv.
Ms. Sweta Sharma, Adv.
Digitally signed by
Sanjay Kumar
Date: 2021.08.07
11:19:05 IST
Reason: Mr. R. C. Kaushik, AOR
2
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
SLP(C) No.168/2021
1 The High Court dismissed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, challenging the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, on the ground that the issue was covered by its earlier decision in Writ Petition (C) No 5640 of 2018. This Court has dismissed Special Leave Petition (C) Diary No 24678 of 2020 against the judgment of the High Court dated 5 December 2019 (which has been relied upon) on 24 February 2021.
3 The record also indicates that the respondent was contesting his rights right from April 2016 when an OA was filed before the Central Administrative Tribunal. In this view of the matter and particularly having regard to the fact that the respondent was, in contest, for pursuing his rights and remedies in accordance with law, we see no reason to entertain the Special Leave Petition. 4 The Special Leave Petition is accordingly dismissed. 5 Ms Madhavi Divan, learned Additional Solicitor General, seeks the leave of the Court to withdraw the IA in order to enable the petitioners to pursue their remedies in appropriate proceedings.
6 The IA is accordingly disposed of as withdrawn in terms of the statement made by the learned Additional Solicitor General.
SLP(C) Diary No(s). 25783/2020 1 Delay condoned.
2 The Special Leave Petition is dismissed in terms of the order passed above. 3 3 Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.
(SANJAY KUMAR-I) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR)
AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER