Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. vs. Sasidharan K

Court:Supreme Court of India
Judge:Hon'ble Hon'Ble The Chief Justice
Case Status:Disposed
Order Date:10 Mar 2014
CNR:SCIN010170542013

AI Summary

Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order

Order Issued After Hearing

Purpose:

Case Registered

Listed On:

18 Jul 2013

Original Order Copy

Get a certified copy of this order

Download True Copy

Order Text

ITEM NO.22 COURT NO.10 SECTION XIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A. No.3 in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).7716/2013 (From the judgement and order dated 10/07/2012 in OP No.1576/2012 of the HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM) B.S.N.L. & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS M. SETHUMADHAVAN & ORS. Respondent(s) (For impleadment as party respondent) Date: 10/03/2014 This Petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. GOPALA GOWDA (In Chambers) For Petitioner(s) Mr. Nikilesh Ramachandran,Adv. Mr. Anurag Gohil,Adv. Mr. Prayuman Cheedi,Adv. Mr. A.K. Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Venkita Subramoniam T.R.,Adv. Ms. Rani Chhabra,Adv.

Ms. Priyanka Sony,Adv.

UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for the respondents. It is stated in the application for impleadment that the applicant proposed to be impleaded as respondent is similarly placed to that of the respondents in this special leave petition. The respondents employees got the orders from the Central Administrative Tribunal in their favour which was upheld by the High Court. That order was challenged by the petitioners-employer before this Court by filing special leave petition. It is further stated that the members of the applicant Association could approach the High Court, further any decision that will be taken in the special leave petition will affect the rights of members of the applicant Association. Though the petitioners-employers have filed statement of objections to the application filed for impleadment, there is no averment to the effect that the members of the applicant Association are not similarly placed as that of the respondents-employees and it has not denied the above fact. Therefore, in my considered view they appear to be necessary parties. The application for impleadment is therefore allowed. Learned counsel for the petitioners may amend the cause title within two weeks.

ú

(A.S. BISHT) (S.S.R. KRISHNA)

Share This Order

Case History of Orders

Order(24) - 8 Jan 2015

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(25) - 8 Jan 2015

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(23) - 9 Dec 2014

Office Report

Click to view

Order(20) - 18 Nov 2014

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(21) - 18 Nov 2014

Office Report - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(22) - 18 Nov 2014

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(17) - 17 Oct 2014

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(18) - 17 Oct 2014

Office Report - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(19) - 17 Oct 2014

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(13) - 22 Sept 2014

ROP

Click to view

Order(14) - 22 Sept 2014

Office Report

Click to view

Order(15) - 22 Sept 2014

Office Report

Click to view

Order(16) - 22 Sept 2014

ROP

Click to view

Order(12) - 10 Mar 2014

ROP - of Main Case

Viewing

Order(11) - 27 Jan 2014

ROP

Click to view

Order(10) - 11 Dec 2013

ROP

Click to view

Order(9) - 20 Nov 2013

ROP

Click to view

Order(8) - 4 Oct 2013

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(7) - 26 Sept 2013

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(6) - 25 Sept 2013

ROP

Click to view

Order(5) - 10 Sept 2013

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(4) - 2 Aug 2013

ROP

Click to view

Order(3) - 26 Apr 2013

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(2) - 4 Feb 2013

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(1) - 21 Jan 2013

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view