Disposed

Ojaswi Bundela v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi HC5 Mar 2024W.P.(C)/1222/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court held a writ petition filed against an order of the Respondent No. 3 (Quality Council of India) not maintainable in this Court. Citing its status as a notified institution under the Central Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985, the Court withdrew the petition on withdrawal, permitting refiling before the CAT with interim protection extended.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition withdrawn on withdrawal with liberty to file before the jurisdictional Central Administrative Tribunal; interim order extended for 10 days.

Ojaswi Bundela Vs Union of India & Ors. — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~76

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 1222/2024

¶4

OJASWI BUNDELA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Nishant Mandal and Ms. Sunita, Advocates

¶5

versus

¶6

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Vikas Chopra and Mr. Neeraj Kumar, Advocates for R-3

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA

¶9

O R D E R % 05.03.2024

¶10

(The proceeding has been conducted through Hybrid Mode) CM APPL. 13805/2024(Seeking vacation of interim order)

¶11

This is an application filed on behalf of applicant / respondent no.3 under Section 151 CPC seeking vacation of interim order dated 29.01.2024 by this Court. 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the applicant/respondent no.3 submits that apart from the application, it would be relevant for this Court to note that the respondent no.3/Quality Council of India is a notified institution under sub Section 2 of Section 14 of the Central Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985. The said notification was issued on 22.04.2008.

¶12

On that basis, learned counsel for the applicant/respondent no.3 submits that this Court would not have the jurisdiction to hear the present writ petition.

¶13

This is a digitally signed order.

¶14

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 11/03/2024 at 11:29:29

¶15

In view of the aforesaid fact as also the Gazette Notification, learned counsel appearing for the non-applicant/petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file the same, on the same cause of action before the appropriate jurisdictional Central Administrative Tribunal. He only seeks that the protection granted to the petitioner in the meanwhile be continued for some time. 5. In view of aforesaid, this Court is of the considered opinion that the writ petition itself would not be maintainable in view of the Gazette Notification and Section 14(2) of the Central Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985.

¶16

The petition along with the annexures and the applications are permitted to be withdrawn to be filed before the jurisdictional Central Administrative Tribunal extending the interim order for the next ten days. The learned Tribunal is requested to consider the application on their own merits as and when filed by the petitioner.

¶17

The Gazette Notification is taken on record.

¶18

Petitioner is permitted to withdraw the present writ petition and refile the same before the jurisdictional Central Administrative Tribunal without prejudice to the right and contentions raised in the present petition.

¶19

The next date i.e. 06.03.2024 stands cancelled.

¶20

TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J

¶21

MARCH 5, 2024/ ms

¶22

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 11/03/2024 at 11:29:29

Ojaswi Bundela v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ojaswi Bundela v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Susheel Jain Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 27, Delhi & Anr.

Devi Lal Choudhary Vs Union of India & Anr.

Nettel Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Commissioner of Police & Anr.

Amar Enterprises through Its Proprietor Vs Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Services Tax and Anr.

Pooja Sharma Vs the Registrar General High Court of Delhi and Ors.

Pankaj Dhiman Vs the Registrar General High Court of Delhi and Ors.

Susheel Jain Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 27, Delhi & Anr.

East Delhi Municipal Corporation Vs Sandeep Goyal and Anr.

Raj Singh & Ors. Vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Priyal Grover Vs Delhi Subordinate Service Selection Board & Ors.

Shubham Kumar Vs Indian Overseas Bank & Anr.

Shasi Kant Vs Union of India through the Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs & Ors.

Nand Lal Dahariya Vs Union of India & Ors.

Piyush Anand Vs Union Public Service Commission & Anr.