Disposed

Union of India Thru. Secy. Railway Board and 3 Others v. Central Administrative Tribunal Lko and 2 Others

Allahabad HC30 Sept 2022/6546/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a writ petition challenging an interlocutory interim order of the Central Administrative Tribunal. The Court declined to interfere with the impugned order and directed the Tribunal to decide the stay vacation application promptly.

What did the court decide?

Request to the Central Administrative Tribunal to decide the stay vacation application within ten days; directions that no adjournment be permissible in Tribunal proceedings.

Union of India Thru. Secy. Railway… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6546 of 2022 Petitioner :- Union Of India Thru. Secy. Railway Board And 3 Others Respondent :- Central Administrative Tribunal Lko And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sudhanshu Chauhan

¶2

Hon'ble Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya,J. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

¶3

Heard Sri Sudhanshu Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶4

By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, a challenge has been made to the order dated 26.02.2021 passed by the Lucknow Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal in Original Application No.223 of 2020, whereby the learned Central Administrative Tribunal has passed an interim order providing therein that the petitioners (respondents before the Central Administrative Tribunal) shall not proceed with the enquiry against the respondent no.2.

¶5

The order under challenge is only an interlocutory order and as such, we are not inclined to interfere in this petition.

¶6

However, it has been informed by the learned counsel for the petitioners that in the Original Application before the Central Administrative Tribunal, the appellants have filed their counter afÏdavit, however no rejoinder to the said counter afÏdavit has been filed by the respondent no.2, who is the petitioner before the Central Administrative Tribunal. He has further informed that the matter is listed on 17.10.2022.

¶7

In view of the aforesaid, without interfering in the order dated 26.02.2021 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, we dispose of this petition with the request to the Central Administrative Tribunal to consider and decide the stay vacation application on the next date of listing, or any subsequent date to be fixed by the Central Administrative Tribunal within ten days

¶8

thereafter.

¶9

We further direct that no adjournment shall be permissible in the proceedings before the Central Administrative Tribunal.

¶10

Order Date :- 30.9.2022 Rahul

¶11

Digitally signed by RAHUL TRIPATHI Date: 2022.10.01 16:25:59 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Union of India Thru. Secy. Railway Board and 3 Others v. Central Administrative Tribunal Lko and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union of India Thru. Secy. Railway Board and 3 Others v. Central Administrative Tribunal Lko and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jagdish Sharma Vs Smt. Sandhya Sharma and Anr.

Ashutosh Sharma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Urban Development Govt. of U.P. Civil Secrt. Lko. and Ors.

Gajanand Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Rural Devolopment Lko. and 6 Others

Rajesh Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko and Others

Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti Thru. Its Commissioner and 2 Others Vs Abhishek Verma Thru His Father Chandra Pal and 6 Others

Ram Sagar and Another Vs Addl. Commissioner Judicial , Faizabad and Another