Dismissed

Mohd Islam Ansari v. Director (Personnel) Central Coalfields Limited

Jharkhand HC19 Jun 2024LPA/514/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court condoned a 2-day delay in filing a Letters Patent Appeal under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The appeal was dismissed, but liberty was reserved to the appellant to file a review on the specific legal issue of approval requirements for dismissal under certified standing orders.

What did the court decide?

Liberty reserved to file review; delay condoned.

Mohd Islam Ansari Vs Director (Personnel)… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

L.P.A. No. 514 of 2022

¶3

-----

¶4

Mohd. Islam Ansari … … … Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

Director (Personnel), Central Coalfields Limited, having its office at Darbhanga House, Near Kutchery, P.O. – GPO, P.S. – Kotwali, District – Ranchi (Jharkhand)

¶7

General Manager, Central Coalfields Limited, having its office at Darbhanga House, Near Kutchery, P.O. – GPO, P.S. – Kotwali, District – Ranchi (Jharkhand)

¶8

General Manager, Central Coalfields Limited, Kathara Washery, P.O. – Kathara, P.S. – Kathara, District – Bokaro (Jharkhand)

¶9

Project Officer, Amlo Project, Central Coalfields Limited, Amlo Project, P.O. – Dhori, P.S. – Dhori, District – Bokaro (Jharkhand)

¶10

… … … Respondents

¶11

¶12

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI

¶13

------ For the Appellant : Mr. Shahid Khan, Advocate : Mr. Nikhil Kumar Mehta, Advocate : Mr. Suraj Prakash, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Amit Kumar Das, Advocate

¶14

¶15

Order No. 07 / Dated 19^th June, 2024

¶16

I.A. No. 9079 of 2023

¶17

The present Interlocutory application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 2 days in filing the instant appeal.

¶18

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶19

Having regard to the averments made in this application, we are of

¶20

the view that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from preferring the appeal within the period of limitation.

¶21

Accordingly, I.A. No. 9079 of 2023 is allowed and the 2 days’ delay

¶22

in preferring the appeal is condoned.

¶23

L.P.A. No. 514 of 2022

¶24

Mr. Shahid Khan, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that the order of dismissal which requires to be approved as per provision of certified standing order as under clause 28.06 wherein, the provision has been made that the punishment of dismissal is to discharge or removal from the service of a workman is required to be approved by the competent authority and above the charge-sheeting authority specified by the Managing Director for this purpose.

¶25

Page 1

¶26

It has been contended that the aforesaid legal issue has not been raised before the learned Single Judge and in that view of the matter, he seeks leave of this Court with a liberty to file review.

¶27

Mr. Das, has no objection.

¶28

Accordingly, the instant Letters Patent Appeal is dismissed.

¶29

However, liberty is reserved to the writ petitioner/appellant to file review if the appellant so wishes.

¶30

Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, also stands dismissed.

¶31

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

¶32

(Arun Kumar Rai, J.)

¶33

Umesh/-

¶34

Page 2

Mohd Islam Ansari v. Director (Personnel) Central Coalfields Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd Islam Ansari v. Director (Personnel) Central Coalfields Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tanu Kumari Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Director Higher Education H R D Deptt

Mahendra Prakash Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand through Its Secretary Deptt of Home

Jharkhand State Electricity Board (Now Jharkhand Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd) through Its Chairman Vs Bina Devi

The State of Jharkhand Vs Om Prakash Gupta

The State of Jharkhand Vs Sukhram Prasad Mani

Senior Area Manager Indian Oil Corporation Limited Vs Union of India