Disposed
Pradeep Sharma and Anr. v. Airports Authority of India
Delhi HCW.P.(C)/7051/2010
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C)…
What the court decided
AI extract
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.
$~10
versus
AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA ..... Respondent Through Mr. Digvijay Rai, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA O R D E R % 08.08.2017
C.M. No.5435/2017
The respondents have filed the present application to place on record additional affidavit.
Application is allowed and the additional affidavit is taken on record.
W.P.(C) 7051/2010
As per the additional affidavit of Harish Mehta, Assistant General Manager (HR) with the Airports Authority of India filed by the respondents, the issue with regard to notification of Recruitment and Promotion Guidelines, 2005 has been examined. Ministry of Civil Aviation had referred the matter to Ministry of Law and Justice, and the Legislative Department of the said Ministry has given their opinion affirming that the aforesaid Regulations should be notified and published in the Official Gazette and draft of the Regulations may
be forwarded to the Ministry for consideration and notification. This decision was approved by the Competent Authority on 19th January, 2017.
Paragraph 13 of the affidavit records that the Airports Authority of India has decided to process the Regulations for notification and the same would be sent to the Ministry of Civil Aviation within eight months from 19th January, 2017. Eight months are going to end in September, 2017.
Counsel for the respondents states that they would process the case for notification expeditiously.
We take the affidavit on record and dispose of the present writ petition as the petitioner, as is recorded in the order dated 8th August, 2016, had pressed for notification of the aforesaid Regulations.
In view of the stand and stance now adopted by the respondents, no further orders are required to be passed. We would clarify that the Regulations referred to above include the amendments made by the respondents from time to time. We also clarify that we have not examined other issues and aspects for the petitioners have not pressed for the same. The writ petition is disposed of.
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
NAVIN CHAWLA, J.
AUGUST 08, 2017 NA
Pradeep Sharma
Airports Authority of India
Sanjiv Khanna
Navin Chawla
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