A writ petition wherein the petitioner approached the Tribunal twice. The Tribunal dismissed the case noting it had been disposed of earlier. The High Court found no case out for interference, rejecting the petition.
The writ petition is rejected.
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.
: 1 :
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.3359 OF 2007
Ravindra S. Jadhav....Petitioner
V/s.
Union of India and others ....Respondents
Mr.Padmakar Kharat for the Petitioner.
Mr.Kiran Khanpile for the Respondents.
CORAM : F.I. REBELLO &
R.M. SAVANT, JJ.
DATED : 18TH JUNE, 2007.
P.C. :
1.We have heard the learned counsel for the
Petitioner. The Petitioner had earlier approached the
Tribunal. That application was rejected by an order
dated 22.10.2003. Liberty was however given to make a
representation. That representation was made and the
same has been rejected by the Respondents. The
Petitioner once again approached the Tribunal, the
Tribunal by the impugned order dated 15.9.2006
considered the case of the Petitioner as also its
earlier finding. The Tribunal noted that on merits,
the case has been disposed of by its earlier order and
only liberty was given to the Petitioner to make a
representation. That representation had been
considered and rejected.
: 2 :
2.In our view,considering that the
Petitioner’s case had originally been rejected and the
Respondents have refused to reconsider the
Petitioner’s case and the Petitioner had only served
from 2.6.1994 to 30.11.1994 and thereafter from
1.6.1997 to 30.11.1997, no case made out for
interference. The impugned order also does not suffer
from any error apparent on the face of the record. No
interference is called for. Hence the Petition is
rejected.
(R.M. SAVANT, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to any relief after earlier rejection by the Tribunal and refusal by respondents to reconsider.
Ravindra S. Jadhav
Union of India
F.I. REBELLO
R.M. SAVANT
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court