Mamta Dhasmana vs. Union Of India Ministry Of Human Resource Development Thru Its Sectretary
AI Summary
Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
Fixed Date by Court
Before:
Hon'ble Arun Mishra, Hon'ble Indira Banerjee
Stage:
AFTER NOTICE (FOR ADMISSION) - CIVIL CASES
Remarks:
Disposed off
Listed On:
18 Feb 2020
In:
Judge
Category:
UNKNOWN
Interlocutory Applications:
84073/2017,192997/2019,
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
ITEM NO.12
COURT NO.3
SECTION XIV
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 22907/2017
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 21-08-2017 in WP No. 9503/2016 passed by the High Court Of Delhi At New Delhi)
MAMTA DHASMANA & ORS.
Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
Respondent $(s)$
PERMISSION $\mathbf{T}\mathbf{0}$ FILE 84073/2017 ADDITIONAL $(IA)$ No. DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) (IA No. 192997/2019 - STAY APPLICATION)
Date: 18-02-2020 This matter was called on for hearing today.
- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE
- For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ambar Qamaruddin, AOR Mr. Tejasvi Kumar, Adv. Ms. Surbhi Guleria, Adv.
- For Respondent(s) Ms. Pinky Anand, ASG Ms. Seema Bengani, Adv. Mr. Ran Vijav Singh, Adv. Mr. Vikas Bansal, Adv. Ms. Saudamini Sharma, Adv. Ms. Akshita Goyal, Adv. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR Mr. Syed Abdul Haseeb, AOR
Mr. Tanveer Zaki, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following 0 R D F R
It is agreed to by the parties that the petitioners shall file epresentation for regularisation as they are serving with effect $\overline{\mathbf{P}}$ om 2005 and they have rendered their services for approximately Let the representation be filed within a period of one 14 years. month from today. Let the representation be considered and decided by the respondents sympathetically and by a reasoned order within a period of four months from the date it is filed.
The observations made by the High Court shall not come in the way of the petitioners in filing and consideration of representation.
The petitioners' case can also be considered for continuation of services vis-a-vis to the posts which have been notified.
In view of the above, the Special Leave Petition is disposed of.
Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, is/are disposed of.
(JAYANT KUMAR ARORA) (JAGDISH CHANDER) COURT MASTER BRANCH OFFICER