Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

BISHAMBHAR DAYAL versus M.D., U.P.S.R.T.C. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Bishambhar Dayal v. M.D., U.P.S.R.T.C. & Others - WRIT - A No. 44464 of 2002 [2005] RD-AH 2756 (13 September 2005)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon'ble Vineet Saran, J

Re: Civil Misc. Review/Recall Applicationno. 113957 of 2004

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the affidavit filed along with the review/recall application. The Judgment and Order dated 25.2.2004 appears to have been passed on the concession granted by the brief-holder of the learned counsel for the respondent-Corporation who had admitted that the Respondent no.2, Assistant  Regional Manager, did not have the power to pass the order of termination whereas on the contrary Sri Sameer Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent, who has filed this review/recall application, has stated that such power had been given to the Assistant Regional Managers by an Act passed by the Legislature which he has filed as Annexure-1 to the rejoinder affidavit filed in the review/recall application. Thus in my view the Judgment and Order dated 25.2.2004 deserves to be recalled and is, accordingly, recalled.

Let the matter be heard afresh.

In view of the averments made in the review/recall application in which it has been categorically stated that the counter affidavit filed by the Corporation earlier was contrary to the parawise narrative which had been sent by the Assistant Regional Manager of the Corporation for the purposes of filing the counter affidavit, a prayer has been made that the respondent-Corporation may be granted time to file a fresh and detailed counter affidavit. It has also been stated in the review/recall application that a departmental enquiry against the officer who had sworn the earlier counter affidavit is pending. In such view of the matter the respondents are granted three weeks time to file a fresh counter affidavit to the writ petition. The petitioner shall have two weeks thereafter to file rejoinder affidavit.

List in the week commencing 24.10.2005 before the appropriate Bench.

It is made clear that this matter shall not be treated as tied up or part-heard to me.

Dt/- 13.9.2005

dps

w.p.44464.02


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.