In this writ petition directed against an interlocutory order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, the Court dismissed the plea that serious penal financial consequences due to impending retirement justified interference with the pending grievance.
Writ petition dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 36
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 13905 of 2018
Petitioner :- Ravi Mohan Singh Respondent :- Union Of India And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhagi Rathi Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.
Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Memo of appearance filed by Sri S.M. Mishra on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 to 3 is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The present writ petition is directed against the interlocutory order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench dated 31.5.2018 in O.A./330/583/2018 (Ravi Mohan Singh vs. Post Master General, Bareilly).
The grievance raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is about to retire on 18.6.2018 and the punishment order entailing serious penal financial consequences, cannot be the reason to interfere in the interlocutory order inasmuch as, the grievances being raised by the petitioner herein can very well be addressed by the Tribunal in the pending application.
Dismissed as such.
Order Date :- 15.6.2018 Brijesh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Central Administrative Tribunal should be interfered with an interlocutory order given the petitioner's impending retirement and pending grievance.
Ravi Mohan Singh
Union Of India
Sunita Agarwal
Ajit Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
