The High Court dismissed a writ petition relying on an earlier order dated 18.12.2012 in connected cases, holding the instant petition must fail for the same reasons.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No.25183 of 2014 Date of Decision: December 10, 2014
Union of India and others
.....Petitioners
versus
Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh and another
.....Respondents
CORAM:HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH.
Present : Mr. P.C.Goyal, Advocate, for the petitioners.
-.-
Surya Kant, J. (Oral)
Learned counsel for the petitioners at the outset, very fairly points out that CWP No.25128 of 2012 (Union of India and another versus Central Administrative Tribunal and others) and other connected cases preferred against the orders dated 2.3.2012, 28.2.2012 and 29.3.2012 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh, have since been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 18.12.2012.
For the reasons assigned in the order dated 18.12.2012 passed in the afore-mentioned cases, the instant writ petition must fail and is accordingly dismissed.
MOHINDER KUMAR 2014.12.12 10:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Union of India and another versus Central Administrative Tribunal and othersReferred¶16
CWP No.25128 of 2012
Union of India and others
Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh and another
Surya Kant
Raj Mohan Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
