Disposed

M/s. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd, reptd By its Chairman -cum v. Central Administrative Tribunal, Reptd.

Telangana HC9 Aug 2017WP/1379/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of three Writ Petitions filed by Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. against interim orders of the Central Administrative Tribunal. The proceedings were declared infructuous due to the efflux of time, with liberty to private respondents to pursue pending miscellaneous petitions.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petitions disposed as infructuous; related interim orders and miscellaneous petitions vacated or disposed.

M/s. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd, reptd By its… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2017)

¶1

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY

¶2

AND

¶3

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.SHYAM PRASAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION Nos.46903 of 2016 and 264 and 1379 of 2017

¶5

Date:09.8.2017

¶6

WRIT PETITION No.46903 of 2016

¶7

Between :

¶8

M/s Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., reptd by its Chairman-cum-Managing Director, New Delhi and three others.

¶9

..... Petitioners

¶10

And: Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench at Hyderabad and 84 others.

¶11

.....Respondents

¶12

Counsel for the petitioners: Mrs. Ch. Lakshmi Kumari

¶13

Counsel for respondent Nos.4, 56, 58 and 78: Mr. V.Venkateswara

¶14

Rao

¶15

WRIT PETITION No.264 of 2017

¶16

Between : M/s Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., reptd by its Chairman-cum-Managing Director, New Delhi and three others.

¶17

..... Petitioners

¶18

CVNR, J & GSP, J W.P.Nos.46903 of 2016 & 264 & 1379 of 2017 Dated:09.8.2017

¶19

¶20

.....Respondents

¶21

And: Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench at Hyderabad and another.

¶22

Counsel for the petitioners: Mrs. Ch. Lakshmi Kumari Counsel for respondent No.2: Mr. V.Venkateswara Rao

¶23

AND

¶24

WRIT PETITION No.1379 of 2017

¶25

Between : M/s Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., reptd by its Chairman-cum-Managing Director, New Delhi and five others.

¶26

..... Petitioners

¶27

And: Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench at Hyderabad and six others.

¶28

.....Respondents

¶29

Counsel for the petitioners: Mrs. Ch. Lakshmi Kumari

¶30

Counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 6: Mr. V.Venkateswara Rao

¶31

The Court made the following:

¶32

CVNR, J & GSP, J W.P.Nos.46903 of 2016 & 264 & 1379 of 2017 Dated:09.8.2017

¶33

¶34

COMMON ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy)

¶35

These Writ Petitions are filed against separate but identical interim orders granted by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench at Hyderabad (for short ‘the Tribunal) pending the respective O.As.

¶36

At the hearing, Mrs. Ch. Lakshmi Kumari, the learned counsel for the petitioners, and also Mr. V.Venkateswara Rao, the learned counsel for the private respondents, submitted that having regard to the nature of the interim relief granted by the Tribunal in the respective O.As and due to efflux of time, the cause in the Writ Petitions does not survive for adjudication.

¶37

In view of the said representation, these Writ Petitions are disposed of as infructuous, however, with liberty to the private respondents to pursue the pending O.As before the Tribunal.

¶38

As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petitions, interim order, interim order, dated 24.01.2017, in WPMP.No.57768 of 2016, dated 04.01.2017, in WPMP.No.297 of 2017 and interim order, dated 17.01.2017 in WPMP.No.1561 of 2017 are vacated and all the pending Miscellaneous Petitions are disposed of as infructuous.

¶39

_____________________________ JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY

¶40

________________________ JUSTICE G.SHYAM PRASAD

¶41

09^th August 2017 DR

M/s. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd, reptd By its Chairman -cum v. Central Administrative Tribunal, Reptd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd, reptd By its Chairman -cum v. Central Administrative Tribunal, Reptd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. Ntr University of Health Sciences, Vs Dr. Deen Dayal Bung

Union of India Vs E.Sreeramulu

K. Shedrak, Vs The District Collector, (Sw)

M/s. Bharsat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Vs Central Administrative Tribunal

The State of Telangana Vs M.Venkata Narasirnha Goud

M/s. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd, Vs Central Administrative Tribunal, Reptd by its Registrar