Dismissed

Jai Pal v. UOI and Ors.

Delhi HC4 May 2016W.P.(C)/8083/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court refused to entertain a writ petition seeking implementation of a Supreme Court order, directing the petitioner to approach the Supreme Court directly with grievances regarding non-implementation or improper implementation. The petition was disposed of with liberty to approach the Supreme Court.

What did the court decide?

Special leave to approach the Supreme Court for seeking appropriate orders for implementation of its judgment dated 17.2.2014.

Jai Pal Vs UOI and Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2016)

¶1

$~18.

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 8083/2015 JAI PAL ..... Petitioner

¶4

Through: Mr. Rishi Kapoor, Advocate with Mr. Ashish Pandey, Advocate

¶5

versus

¶6

UOI AND ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Akshay Makhija, Advocate with Mr. Akshat Kumar, Ms. Mahima Bahl and Mr. Sumant Bhushan, Advocates

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR O R D E R % 04.05.2016

¶9

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner praying inter alia for issuing a writ of certiorari, for quashing the order dated 26.05.2014, passed by the respondents/CISF, seeking to implement an order dated 17.02.2014, passed by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.31137/2011. The second relief prayed for by the petitioner is for directions to the respondents to grant him all the benefits of continuity of service, financial upgradation under the ACP/MACP schemes at par with his juniors, in terms of the order of the Supreme Court.

¶10

On 24.02.2016, it was inquired from the counsel for the petitioner as to how would the present petition be maintainable when the petitioner is only seeking implementation of the judgment dated 17.02.2014, passed by

¶11

WP(C) 8803/2015 Page 1 of 2

¶12

the Supreme Court and why had he not approached the Supreme Court directly for seeking directions to the respondents. In response, the proxy counsel appearing for the counsel for the petitioner had sought an adjournment to obtain instructions.

¶13

Today, counsel for the petitioner submits that the present petition is based on a fresh cause of action inasmuch as the impugned order dated 26.05.2014 was issued by the respondents subsequently.

¶14

The aforesaid submission is found to be untenable for the simple reason that the order dated 26.05.2014 itself states that it has been issued for implementation of the order dated 17.02.2014 passed by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.31137/2011. If it is the case of the petitioner that the respondents have failed to implement or improperly implemented the directions issued in the captioned appeal, then it is for him to approach the Supreme Court with the said grievance. However, a fresh petition for seeking the said relief and that too before the High Court, is not the remedy. 5. The petition is accordingly disposed of with liberty granted to the petitioner to approach the Supreme Court for seeking appropriate orders for implementation of its order dated 17.2.2014 in the captioned appeal.

¶15

HIMA KOHLI, J

¶16

SUNIL GAUR, J

¶17

MAY 04, 2016 rkb/ap

¶18

WP(C) 8803/2015 Page 2 of 2

Jai Pal v. UOI and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jai Pal v. UOI and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.S.Traders Vs Union of India & Ors.

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Vs Union of India & Ors.

Mangali Impex Ltd. Vs Union of India and Ors.

D.P. Sharma Vs M/S Bses Rajdhani Power Limited

M/S Rathore Fair Price Shop Vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Greatship (India) Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Syndicate Bank Vs Anand Prasad & Anr.

Kiran Jain & Ors. Vs North Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Renu Kumari Vs Union of India and Anr.

Chandan Kumar Vs Union of India & Anr.

Rituja Neog Vs Union of India and Anr.

S.I. (M). R.N. Kulhari Vs Union of India & Ors.

Subhas Chandra Sarkar Vs Union of India & Anr.

Constable Veer Singh Vs Union of India & Anr.