A single judge dismissed this time extension application filed by the respondent. No plausible reasons were assigned for extending the time limit to conclude the inquiry, thus no interference was required.
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
MCC No. 482 of 2017
WPMS No.2173 of 2015
Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.
Mr. S.K. Mandal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. D.C.S. Rawat, Advocate for the respondents.
This writ petition along with other connected petitions were disposed of by this Court vide judgment and order dated 10.11.2016. The relevant portion of the said judgment reads as under:-
“Since this being the only prayer of the petitioners, the writ petitions stand disposed with a direction to the authority concerned to expedite the matter, so that all depositors, including the petitioners, should not be put into inconvenience. It is an objection raised by counsel for the Union of India that the delay, if any, has also been caused due to non cooperation of the petitioners in the enquiry, who are the actual witnesses in the said enquiry. In the present case, one year time has already been elapsed, therefore, it is further made clear that the enquiry be concluded within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, subject to the cooperation of the petitioners, in the ongoing enquiry.”
Now a time extension application has been filed on behalf of respondents to extend the time for completing the inquiry. No plausible reasons have been assigned as to why time be extended and as to what compelling reasons were there for not completing the inquiry in time.
In view thereof, no interference is called for. Time extension application (MCC No. 482 of 2017) stands dismissed.
(Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.)
03.07.2017
Ankit
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the time extension application for completing the inquiry should be permitted?
Union of India
Sudhanshu Dhulia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
