Secr. , Ministry Of Defence Secretary vs. Babita Puniya
AI Summary
Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
Mention Memo
Before:
Hon'ble Hon'Ble The Chief Justice, Hon'ble Indu Malhotra, Hon'ble K.M. Joseph
Stage:
FRESH (FOR ADMISSION) - CIVIL CASES
Remarks:
Dismissed as withdrawn
Listed On:
17 Sept 2020
In:
Judge
Category:
UNKNOWN
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
ITEM NO.3 Court 3 (Video Conferencing) SECTION XIV-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
CONMT.PET.(C) No. 542-544/2020 in C.A. No. 9367-9369/2011
LT COL RITA TANEJA & ORS. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
GEN MANOJ MUKUND NARVANE & ANR. Respondent(s)
(FOR ADMISSION and IA No.80016/2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT and IA No.82131/2020-CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION )
WITH
MA 1612-1614/2020 in C.A. No. 9367-9369/2011 (XIV-A) (FOR ADMISSION and IA No.84762/2020-CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION and IA No.84760/2020-APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION)
Date : 17-09-2020 These petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDU MALHOTRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.M. JOSEPH
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Mohan Kumar, AOR
Mr. M. Balasubramanium, Sr. Adv.
- Mr. Radhakrishnan, Sr. Adv.
- Ms. Neela Gokhale, Adv.
- Mr. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR
- For Respondent(s) Ms. Meenakshi Arora, Sr. Adv. Ms. Chitrangada Rastravara, Adv. Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
Ms. Meenakshi Arora, senior counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants and Mr. Mohan Kumar, counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the grievance relates to the manner in which the Army authorities have sought to implement the judgment of this Court dated 17 February 2020 passed in Civil Appeal Nos. 9367-9369 of 2011 more specifically by issuing the instructions contained in Annexure P-2, the Digitally signed by ARJUN BISHT Date: 2020.09.17 19:28:34 IST Reason: Signature Not Verified
applicants/petitioners have been advised to take recourse to a substantive petition under Article 32 of the Constitution instead of pursuing the interlocutory applications or contempt petitions. Accordingly, it has been submitted that the applicants/petitioners may be permitted to withdraw the applications and the contempt petitions since they seek to espouse their remedies as stated above.
Both, the Miscellaneous Applications and the Contempt Petitions are, accordingly, disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as sought.
(GULSHAN KUMAR ARORA) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER