Single-line order refusing extension of time to claim backwages in a service dispute where petitioner agreed to waive claim. Case 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.
$~1
LAKSHMY ANANTHA RAMAN ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.K.Venkataraman, Advocate
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Jaswinder Singh, Advocate
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA
% 12.04.2017 CM No.12570/2017 (for extension)
We are not inclined to extend the time fixed by order dated 2nd February, 2017.
The petitioner/non-applicant had agreed not to claim backwages. Accordingly, we had directed that the petitioner would be paid the salary as Demonstrator with effect from 1st March, 2017.
The application stands dismissed.
Dasti.
SANJIV KHANNA, J
ANU MALHOTRA, J
APRIL 12, 2017/sv
LAKSHMY ANANTHA RAMAN
UNION OF INDIA
SANJIV KHANNA
ANU MALHOTRA
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
