The State Of Delhi Union Of India& Ors. vs. Jagdish Lal Jat
AI Summary
Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
Fixed Date by Court
Before:
Hon'ble Hon'Ble The Chief Justice, Hon'ble Vineet Saran
Stage:
FRESH (FOR ADMISSION) - CIVIL CASES
Remarks:
List On (Date) [25-11-2019]
Listed On:
11 Aug 2019
In:
Judge
Category:
UNKNOWN
Interlocutory Applications:
83653/2018,
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.7 SECTION XV
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C)......CC No.9778/2014
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 04-12-2013 in CWP No.7175/2010 passed by the High Court Of Judicature For Rajasthan At Jaipur)
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
JAGDISH LAL JAT Respondent(s)
(IA No.83653/2018 – FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING)
Date : 08-11-2019 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN
For Petitioner(s) Ms. Binu Tamta, Adv. Mr. Sumit Teterwal, Adv. Mr. Chakitan V.S. Papta, Adv. Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, AOR
For Respondent(s)
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
Ms. Binu Tamta, learned counsel invited our attention to portion of the order passed by this Court on 28.01.2014 disposing of I.A. No.1 in I.A. No.201/2006 as having become infructuous. In respect of said I.A., an order was passed by this Court on 22.04.2008 and the operative part was as under:
Digitally signed by MUKESH KUMAR Date: 2019.11.13 17:38:21 IST Reason: Signature Not Verified
"We are told that the 6th petitioner is working as Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal,m Kerala and Lakshadweep and he has not been extended the benefits. The Union Government is directed to pass appropriate orders within a period of eight weeks for extending the benefits to officers working on deputation. A copy of this order be served to the Union of India."
According to Ms. Tamta, Union Government has rejected the representation made by the person concerned and since then it has been the consistent stand of the Union that persons who have worked as Presiding Officers, Debts Recovery Tribunal, are not to be extended the benefits in terms of the recommendations made by the Shetty Commission.
At her request, we adjourn the matter to 25.11.2019 to enable the petitioners to place on record all such orders passed in the cases of Presiding Officers of Debts Recovery Tribunal rejecting their representations.
(MUKESH NASA) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) COURT MASTER BRANCH OFFICER