1 NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 1875 OF 2022 (Arising out of SLP(C)No.19181 of 2017) The Managing Director, Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Ajmer & Anr. …APPELLANT(S) VERSUS Chiggan Lal & Ors. …RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R 1. Abatement is set aside and delay in filing of the application for substitution is condoned. I.A.No.47721 of 2018 is allowed and the legal representatives of the deceased Birbal-respondent no.16 are brought on record. 2. Leave granted. 3. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 04.01.2017 passed in D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.117/2006 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench, has confirmed the order of the learned Single Judge dated 06.05.2005 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5326/1990. 4. The respondents herein were engaged by the appellant as unskilled labour on daily wages on different dates from 06.04.1980 to 17.05.1980. The appellant passed an office Order dated
2 18.06.1980, by which the strength of the employees, inclusive of casual labour, was frozen to the number of employees as it stood on 31.05.1980. The decision was taken in view of the financial condition of the appellant and the considerable number of surplus staff with it. It was also decided that until further orders, no addition was to be made to the strength of the employees as it stood on 31.05.1980. The respondents were declared work charged employees between the period 06.01.1981 to 16.03.1981. According to the respondents, they have completed two years of service after 31.03.1982. 5. On 15.10.1987, the appellant issued Office Order in respect of employees who had completed two years of continuous service as on 31.03.1982, who could not be considered earlier. On 15.01.1988, the appellant issued an Office Order by which the earlier Screening Committee formed vide Order dated 26.09.1983 was authorized to screen the work charged/casual-monthly or daily rated workmen, who have completed two years of service as on 31.03.1983, or thereafter to adjudge suitability for regularization and grant of regular pay-scale. The appellant vide an Office Order dated 02.03.1989 partially modified the earlier Office Order dated 15.01.1988 and the Screening Committee was reconstituted to screen and adjudge the suitability of the work charged/casual-
3 monthly or daily rated workmen who have completed two years continuous service as on 31.03.1983 for regularization and grant of regular pay scale. 6. The respondents herein vide Office Order dated 29.06.1989, were regularized and allowed regular pay scale with effect from 01.04.1989 as per the recommendation of the Screening Committee, the relevant portion of which is as under: “In terms of Board’s order No.RSEB/S.3/F.3(525- II)D.1009 dt.2.3.89, vide which the Screening Committee constituted by the Board and meeting of the Committee was convened on 28.3.89 to Screen the Work charged/Casual-monthly, daily rated workers who have completed 2 years of continuous service as on 31 st March, 1983 or thereafter and are continuing in Board’s service to adjudge their suitability for regularization and grant of regular pay scale. The Committee has adjudged suitable of the following workers for allowing regular pay scale No.1. Accordingly, the following workers are hereby allowed Board’s pay scale No.1 w.e.f. 1.4.89 and post mentioned against each of their name with immediate effect. The regular salary will be paid by the concerned Assistant Engineer where the workers will be posted by the Executive Engineer (O&M) RSEB, Neemkathana.” 7. The respondents filed S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5326 of 1990 before the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench against the Order dated 29.06.1989, passed by the appellant, seeking regular pay scale with effect from 01.04.1983 instead of 01.04.1989 by contending that they should be brought at par with those employees who had been fixed at the regular pay scale vide
4 Order dated 15.10.1987 instead of 01.04.1989. The High Court by its Order dated 06.05.2005 allowed the Writ Petition which has been confirmed by the Division Bench. 8. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 9. It is the settled position that the date from which regularization is to be granted is a matter to be decided by the employer keeping in view a number of factors like the nature of the work, number of posts lying vacant, the financial condition of the employer, the additional financial burden caused, the suitability of the workmen for the job, the manner and reason for which the initial appointments were made etc. The said decision will depend upon the facts of each year and no parity can be claimed based on regularization made in respect of the earlier years. 10. This Court in Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. V. Nanu Ram and Others 1 , has held that the employer is required to examine the question as to how many workmen could be regularized keeping in mind, the budget provisions, availability of the posts, the number of muster roll workers engaged in construction work without their being existence of any vacant sanctioned posts and the manner in which these muster roll workers were initially recruited i.e. whether with or without the approval of the management, thereafter examining the above, the employer has to recommend 1
(2006) 12 SCC 494
5 their absorption in regular service on the basis of eligibility as determined by the Screening Committee. It was held that mere completion of two years is not the only criterion and that the State is not under an obligation to constitute Screening Committee at the end of each year. Constitution of the Screening Committee is within the discretion of the State Government dependent upon the aforesaid factors. Applying the above principles, it was held in that case that: “9. …Even in the award dated 31-5-1978 read with award dated 15-6-1979 the fixation in the regular pay scale was only for those employees who were recruited with the approval of the management and in accordance with law. Even under the awards, as they then stood, the Screening Committee had to examine the performance of the workmen before granting them the regular pay scale. Granting of pay scale simpliciter is different from grant of permanency. While granting permanency, the State has to consider the number of posts falling vacant, those posts should exist as and by way of regular vacancy, the financial burden of granting permanency and, therefore, in our view, the High Court has failed to keep in mind the difference between the concept of grant of pay scale as distinct from grant of permanency. The State was not under an obligation to constitute Screening Committee at the end of each year. Constitution of the Screening Committee was within the discretion of the State Government dependent upon the above factors. Therefore, there was no question of comparing the case of the present respondents with the case of the workmen who got regularised prior to 31-3-1982. Each exercise by the Screening Committee has to be seen in the light of the above factors. In a given exercise, the State may have sufficient number of vacant posts to accommodate certain number of workers. However, that may not be the case in the subsequent years. Therefore, there is no
6 question of any discrimination in the matter of regularisation or in the matter of grant of permanency.” 11. This Court, in The Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Limited, Kota v. Shri Karam Singh – Civil Appeal No(s).8807- 8808 of 2016, reiterated the above principles as under: “7. In the face of the aforesaid view taken by this Court in Civil Appeal No.1042 of 2006, we do not see how the Division Bench of the High Court could have found the workman entitled to regular pay scale from 1 st April, 1983 though he was found entitled to regularization with effect from 1 st April, 1989. While it is correct that the workman may have been entitled to regular pay scale from 1 st April, 1983 grant of the same would have to be linked to the availability of a post carrying that pay-scale. As the same became available from 1 st April, 1989, from which date regularization was granted, the High Court, according to us, could not have granted the benefit of regular pay-scale from 1 st April, 1983. In that view of the matter, we interfere with the order of the High Court insofar as grant of regular pay scale is concerned and hold that the respondent workman is entitled to the benefit of regular pay-scale as well as regularization with effect from 1 st April, 1989.” 12. In view of the above, it is clear that the date of regularization and grant of pay scale is a prerogative of the employer/screening committee and no parity can be claimed in the matter of regularization in different years. Therefore, the High Court was not justified in directing payment of arrears and in fixing the grant of regular pay-scale w.e.f. 01.04.1983. The appeal is accordingly allowed and the judgment and order of the Division Bench of the
7 High Court dated 04.01.2017 in D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.117/2006 and the order of the learned Single Judge dated 06.05.2005 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5326/1990 are set aside. The parties shall bear their own costs. ….……………………………J. (S. ABDUL NAZEER) ….……………………………J. (KRISHNA MURARI) New Delhi; March 07, 2022.
1 NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 1876 OF 2022 (Arising out of SLP(C)No.3395 of 2020) Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Parasaran Nigam Ltd. & Ors. …APPELLANT(S) VERSUS Roopa Ram Jat …RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R 1. Leave granted. 2. In terms of the order passed by this Court in Civil Appeal No.1875 of 2022 arising out of SLP©No.19181 of 2017 – The Managing Director, Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Ajmer & Anr. V. Chiggan Lal & Ors. Dated 07.03.2022 , this appeal is allowed and the judgment and order of the Division Bench of the High Court of Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur, dated 23.08.2017 in D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.1348/2007 and the order of the learned Single Judge dated 04.09.2006 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1030/1997 are set aside. The parties shall bear their own costs. ….……………………………J. (S. ABDUL NAZEER) ….……………………………J. (KRISHNA MURARI) New Delhi; March 07, 2022.
1 ITEM NO.27 Court 7 (Video Conferencing) 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(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 19181/2017 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 04-01-2017 in DBSAW No. 117/2006 passed by the High Court Of Judicature For Rajasthan At Jaipur) THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD., AJMER & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS CHIGGAN LAL & ORS. Respondent(s) IA No. 47721/2018 - APPLICATION FOR SUBSTITUTION IA No. 47722/2018 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING SUBSTITUTION APPLN.) WITH SLP(C) No. 3395/2020 (XV) FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING ON IA 33368/2018 IA No. 33368/2018 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) SLP(C) No. 3437/2020 (XV) FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING ON IA 109755/2017 IA No. 109755/2017 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) SLP(C) No. 3396/2020 (XV) ( FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING ON IA 33061/2018 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 33062/2018 IA No. 33061/2018 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING IA No. 33062/2018 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) Date : 07-03-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA MURARI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Puneet Jain, Adv. Ms. Christi Jain, Adv. Mr. Umang Mehta, Adv. Ms. Shruti Singh, Adv. Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR
2 For Respondent(s) Mr. Paritosh Anil, Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR Ms. Mantika Haryani, Adv. Mr. Surya Kant, AOR Ms. Priyanka Tyagi, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R In SLP(C) Nos. 19181/2017 and 3395/2020 Leave granted. Appeals are allowed in terms of the two separate Non Reportable Signed orders. In SLP(C) Nos. 3437 and 3396 of 2020 De-tag and list after four weeks. (NEELAM GULATI) (KAMLESH RAWAT) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH) (Two Non Reportable Signed orders are placed on the file)
ITEM NO.18 Court 7 (Video Conferencing) 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(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 19181/2017 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 04-01-2017 in DBSAW No. 117/2006 passed by the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur) THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS CHIGGAN LAL & ORS. Respondent(s) (IA No. 47721/2018 - APPLICATION FOR SUBSTITUTION IA No. 47722/2018 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING SUBSTITUTION APPLN.) WITH SLP(C) No. 3395/2020 (IA No. 33368/2018 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) SLP(C) No. 3437/2020 (IA No. 109755/2017 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) SLP(C) No. 3396/2020 (IA No. 33061/2018 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING IA No. 33062/2018 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) Date : 29-11-2021 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA MURARI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Umang Mehta,Adv. Mr. Puneet Jain,Adv. Ms. Christi Jain,Adv. Ms. Yashika Sharma,Adv. Mr. Harshit Khanduja,Adv. Ms. Aishwarya Jain,Adv. Mr. Bikash Chandra,Adv. Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Surya Kant, AOR Ms. Priyanka Tyagi,Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR 1
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R As prayed, six weeks' time is granted to file counter affidavit. List after six weeks. (ANITA MALHOTRA) (KAMLESH RAWAT) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER 2
1 REVISED ITEM NO.35 COURT NO.13 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) No.19181/2017 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 04-01-2017 in DBSAW No. 117/2006 passed by the High Court Of Judicature For Rajasthan At Jaipur) AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD THE MANAGING DIRECTOR Petitioner(s) VERSUS CHIGGAN LAL Respondent(s) IA No. 47721/2018 - APPLICATION FOR SUBSTITUTION IA No. 47722/2018 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING SUBSTITUTION APPLN.) WITH Diary No(s). 31315/2017 (XV) (IA FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING ON IA 109755/2017 IA No. 109755/2017 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) Diary No(s). 6273/2018 (XV) ( FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING ON IA 33061/2018 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 33062/2018 IA No. 33061/2018 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING IA No. 33062/2018 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) Diary No(s). 8053/2018 (XV) (FOR FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING ON IA 33368/2018 IA No. 33368/2018 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) Date : 24-01-2020 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Puneet Jain, Adv. Ms. Chrishti Jain, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Deshwal, Adv. Mr. Harsh Jain, Adv. Mr. Pankaj Sharma, Adv. For Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Paritosh Anil, Adv. Mr. Divyansh Tiwari, Adv. For Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR
2 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Issue notice in the fresh matters. Unserved respondents should be served within four weeks. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, be filed within six weeks. List the matter after eight weeks. (RACHNA) (RAJINDER KAUR) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT Assistant Registrar
3 ITEM NO.35 COURT NO.13 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) No.19181/2017 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 04-01-2017 in DBSAW No. 117/2006 passed by the High Court Of Judicature For Rajasthan At Jaipur) AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD THE MANAGING DIRECTOR Petitioner(s) VERSUS CHIGGAN LAL Respondent(s) IA No. 47721/2018 - APPLICATION FOR SUBSTITUTION IA No. 47722/2018 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING SUBSTITUTION APPLN.) WITH Diary No(s). 31315/2017 (XV) (IA FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING ON IA 109755/2017 IA No. 109755/2017 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) Diary No(s). 6273/2018 (XV) ( FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING ON IA 33061/2018 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 33062/2018 IA No. 33061/2018 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING IA No. 33062/2018 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) Diary No(s). 8053/2018 (XV) (FOR FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING ON IA 33368/2018 IA No. 33368/2018 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) Date : 24-01-2020 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Puneet Jain, Adv. Ms. Chrishti Jain, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Deshwal, Adv. Mr. Harsh Jain, Adv. Mr. Pankaj Sharma, Adv. For Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Paritosh Anil, Adv. Mr. Divyansh Tiwari, Adv. For Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR
4 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Issue notice in the fresh matters. Unserved respondents should be served within four weeks. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, be filed within six weeks. List the matter after eight weeks. (RACHNA) (RAJINDER KAUR) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT BRANCH OFFICER
1 ITEM NO.39 COURT NO.14 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(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 19181/2017 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 04-01-2017 in DBSAW No. 117/2006 passed by the High Court Of Judicature For Rajasthan At Jaipur) AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD THE MANAGING DIRECTORPetitioner(s) VERSUS CHIGGAN LAL Respondent(s) IA No. 47721/2018 - APPLICATION FOR SUBSTITUTION IA No. 47722/2018 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING SUBSTITUTION APPLN.) WITH Diary No(s). 31315/2017 (XV) FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING ON IA 109755/2017 IA No. 109755/2017 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) Diary No(s). 6273/2018 (XV) ( FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING ON IA 33061/2018 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 33062/2018 IA No. 33061/2018 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING IA No. 33062/2018 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) Diary No(s). 8053/2018 (XV) FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING ON IA 33368/2018 IA No. 33368/2018 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) Date : 16-12-2019 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Puneet Jain, Adv. Ms. Christi Jain, Adv. Ms. Ankita Gupta, Adv. Mr. Harsh Jain, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Deshwal, Adv. Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR Ms. Shilendra Sharma, Adv.
2 For Respondent(s) Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R In view of the letter circulated by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner to adjourn the matters to enable the petitioner to file rejoinder affidavit, matters are adjourned. As prayed, list after two weeks. (NEELAM GULATI) (RAJINDER KAUR) COURT MASTER (SH) BRANCH OFFICER
ITEM NO.25 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR RAJESH KUMAR GOEL IA 47721/2018,47722/2018, in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 19181/2017 AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD THE MANAGING DIRECTOR Petitioner(s) VERSUS CHIGGAN LAL Respondent(s) (Civil Appeal No. 8807-8807 of 2016 referred to annexure P-2 was dismissed/disposed of by Hon. Court on 07.09.2016 ONLY SC 19181/2017 TO BE LISTED BEFORE THE LD. REGISTRAR'S COURT ON 28.08.2018) WITH Diary No(s). 31315/2017 (XV) (IA No.109755/2017-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) Diary No(s). 8053/2018 (XV) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.33368/2018-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) Diary No(s). 6273/2018 (XV) Date : 22-10-2018 These matters were called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Ms. Veena Rattan, Adv. Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(C)No. 19181/2017 Respondent nos. 1, 2, 8, 10, 12, 14, 17 to 19, 21 to 23, 27, 30 to 33, 35 and 36 have filed counter affidavit. Remaining respondents have been served but no one has entered appearance on their behalf. Registry to process for listing before Hon’ble Court as per rules. RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Registrar
ITEM NO.30 1 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. MANOJ JAIN IA 47721/2018,47722/2018, in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 19181/2017 AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD THE MANAGING DIRECTORPetitioner(s) VERSUS CHIGGAN LAL Respondent(s) (Civil Appeal No. 8807-8807 of 2016 referred to annexure P-2 was dismissed/disposed of by Hon. Court on 07.09.2016 ONLY SC 19181/2017 TO BE LISTED BEFORE THE LD. REGISTRAR'S COURT ON 28.08.2018 ) WITH Diary No(s). 31315/2017 (XV) (IA No.109755/2017-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) Diary No(s). 8053/2018 (XV) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.33368/2018-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) Diary No(s). 6273/2018 (XV) Date : 28-08-2018 These matters were called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(C) No. 19181/2017 Fresh steps for the service of notice by usual mode to respondent Nos.16(6) and Respondent No.16(8) shall be taken by the learned counsel for the petitioners within a period of two weeks’. List again on 22.10.2018. MANOJ JAIN Registrar MG
ITEM NO.43 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. RAJESH KUMAR GOEL IA 47721/2018,47722/2018, in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 19181/2017 AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD THE MANAGING DIRECTORPetitioner(s) VERSUS CHIGGAN LAL Respondent(s) (Civil Appeal No. 88078807 of 2016 referred to annexure P2 was dismissed/disposed of by Hon. Court on 07.09.2016 ONLY SC 19181/2017 TO BE LISTED BEFORE THE LD. REGISTRAR'S COURT ON 09072018 ) WITH Diary No(s). 31315/2017 (XV) (IA No.109755/2017CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) Diary No(s). 8053/2018 (XV) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.33368/2018CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) Diary No(s). 6273/2018 (XV) Date : 12072018 These matters were called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Ms.Veena Rattan,Adv. Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(C) No.19181/2017 Service is complete on the respondent Nos.15, 16(1) to 16(5) & 16(7) but no one has entered appearance on their behalf. ………...2
ITEM NO.43 2 Await return of service of notice already issued to the proposed respondent Nos.16(6) and 16(8). List the matter again on 28.08.2018. RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Registrar SB
ITEM NO.60 COURT NO.2 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(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 19181/2017 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD. AJMER & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS CHIGGAN LAL & ORS. Respondent(s) (IA 47721/2018-APPLICATION FOR SUBSTITUTION AND IA 47722/2018-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING SUBSTITUTION APPLN.) Date : 04-05-2018 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL [IN CHAMBER] For Petitioner(s) Ms. Ankita Gupta,Adv. Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the Respondent No.16 died during the pendency of the matter before the High Court but it was not brought to the notice of the High Court and since he had already retired, the petitioner was not aware of the same. Issue notice on the application for substitution to bring on record the Lrs of deceased respondent No.16 as well as on application for condonation of delay in filing substitution application. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that service is incomplete in respect of Respondent No.15, thus fresh notice may be issued to Respondent No.15. Ordered accordingly. (OM PARKASH SHARMA) (ANITA RANI AHUJA) AR CUM PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
Item No.40 1 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. SANJAY PARIHAR Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 19181/2017 AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD THE MANAGING DIRECTOR Petitioner(s) VERSUS CHIGGAN LAL Respondent(s) (Civil Appeal No. 8807-8807 of 2016 referred to annexure P-2 was dismissed/disposed of by Hon. Court on 07.09.2016 ONLY SC 19181/2017 TO BE LISTED BEFORE THE LD. REGISTRAR'S COURT ON 16.1.2018 ) WITH Diary No(s). 31315/2017 (XV) ( IA No.109755/2017-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) Diary No(s). 8053/2018 (XV) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.33368/2018-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) Diary No(s). 6273/2018 (XV) Date : 23-04-2018 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Ms. Veena Rattan,Adv. Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Paritosh Anil,Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(C) No. 19181/2017 Service of notice is complete on the respondent Nos. 6 and 11 but no one has entered appearance on their behalf. Await the return of the service of notice already issued to the respondent No.15.
Item No.40 2 The office report states that learned counsel for the petitioners has filed an application for substitution to bring on record the Lrs. of the deceased respondent No.16. The said application shall be listed before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers for further future directions. Await orders. List thereafter. SANJAY PARIHAR Registrar MG
ITEM NO.66 COURT NO.11 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 8053/2018 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 23-08-2017 in DBSAW No. 1348/2007 passed by the High Court Of Judicature For Rajasthan At Jaipur) RAJASTHAN RAJYA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LTD & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SHRI ROOPA RAM JAT Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.33368/2018-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) WITH Diary No(s). 6273/2018 (XV) Date : 19-03-2018 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Ms. Christi Jain,Adv. Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Tag with SLP(C)No.19181 of 2017. In the meanwhile, there shall be stay of operation of the impugned order. (OM PARKASH SHARMA) (PARVEEN KUMARI PASRICHA) AR CUM PS BRANCH OFFICER
ITEM NO.20 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. SANJAY PARIHAR Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 19181/2017 AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD THE MANAGING DIRECTORPetitioner(s) VERSUS CHIGGAN LAL Respondent(s) (Civil Appeal No. 8807-8807 of 2016 referred to annexure P-2 was dismissed/disposed of by Hon. Court on 07.09.2016 ONLY SC 19181/2017 TO BE LISTED BEFORE THE LD. REGISTRAR'S COURT ON 16.1.2018) WITH Diary No(s). 31315/2017 (XV) ( IA No.109755/2017-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) Date : 08-03-2018 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Ms. Veena Rattan,Adv. Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Paritosh Anil,Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(C) No. 19181/2017 In respect of respondent Nos. 6, 11, 15 and 16, Ld. Counsel for the petitioners has filed the spare copies. Four weeks time, as last chance is given to file the fresh particulars, failing which the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers. In case of compliance thereof, Registry to issue notice with utmost dispatch. List again on 23.4.2018. SANJAY PARIHAR Registrar MG
Item No.32 1 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. SANJAY PARIHAR Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 19181/2017 AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD THE MANAGING DIRECTOR Petitioner(s) VERSUS CHIGGAN LAL Respondent(s) (Civil Appeal No. 8807-8807 of 2016 referred to annexure P-2 was dismissed/disposed of by Hon. Court on 07.09.2016 ONLY SC 19181/2017 TO BE LISTED BEFORE THE LD. REGISTRAR'S COURT ON 16.1.2018) WITH Diary No(s). 31315/2017 (XV) ( IA No.109755/2017-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) Date : 16-01-2018 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Ms. Veena Rattan,Adv. Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Paritosh Anil,Adv. Mr. Raghunatha Sethupathy,Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(C) No.19181/2017 As per postal tracking report notices issued to the respondent Nos. 6, 11 and 15 could not be served and returned back undelivered. Hence, learned counsel for the petitioners shall within a period of four weeks file the fresh particulars of the said respondents and he shall also take fresh steps for the service of notice to them within the same period.
Item No.32 2 Tracking report also shows that notice issued to the respondent No.16 has been received back with postal remarks “Left India”. Hence, learned counsel for the petitioners shall within a period of four weeks file the fresh particulars of the said respondent and he shall also take fresh steps for the service of notice to him within the same period in compliance with the rules governing the subject. Appearing respondents have already filed the counter affidavit. List again on 8.3.2018. SANJAY PARIHAR Registrar MG
ITEM NO.57 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. SANJAY PARIHAR Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 19181/2017 AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD THE MANAGING DIRECTORPetitioner(s) VERSUS CHIGGAN LAL Respondent(s) (Civil Appeal No. 8807-8807 of 2016 referred to annexure P-2 was dismissed/disposed of by Hon. Court on 07.09.2016) WITH Diary No(s). 31315/2017 (XV) ( IA No.109755/2017-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) Date : 17-11-2017 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Ms.Veena Rattan,Adv. Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr.Paritosh Anil,Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SLP(C) No. 19181/2017 Await the return of service of notice already issued to the respondent Nos.6, 11, 15 & 16. Service of notice is complete on the other respondents, but no one has entered appearance on their behalf. Four weeks time as last chance is given to the appearing respondents to file the counter affidavit. List the matter again on 16.01.2018. SANJAY PARIHAR Registrar SB
ITEM NO.120 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION XV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. SANJAY PARIHAR Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 19181/2017 AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD THE MANAGING DIRECTOR Petitioner(s) VERSUS CHIGGAN LAL Respondent(s) (Civil Appeal No. 8807-8807 of 2016 referred to annexure P-2 was dismissed/disposed of by Hon. Court on 07.09.2016) Date : 22-09-2017 This petition was called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Astha Sharma,Adv. Mr. Paritosh Anil,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Await the return of the service of notice already issued to the respondent Nos.6,11,15 to 16, 24,25 and 34. In respect of other respondents service is complete. Four weeks time is given to the appearing respondents to file the counter affidavit. List again on 17.11.2017 . SANJAY PARIHAR Registrar MG
ITEM NO.9 COURT NO.11 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(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 19181/2017 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 04-01-2017 in DBSAW No. 117/2006 passed by the High Court Of Rajasthan At Jaipur) THE MANAGING DIRECTOR AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS CHIGGAN LAL & ORS. Respondent(s) (Civil Appeal No. 8807-8807 of 2016 referred to annexure P-2 was dismissed/disposed of by Hon. Court on 07.09.2016) Date : 04-08-2017 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER For Petitioner(s) Mr. Puneet Jain,Adv. Ms. Christi Jain,Adv. Mr. Shailender Sharma,Adv. Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Issue notice. In the meanwhile, there shall be stay of operation of the impugned order. (MADHU BALA) (PARVEEN KUMARI PASRICHA) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER
ITEM NO.2 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. RAJESH KUMAR GOEL IA 44319/2017, in Diary No(s). 10177/2017 AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD THE MANAGING DIRECTOR Petitioner(s) VERSUS CHIGGAN LAL Respondent(s) (Civil Appeal No. 8807-8807 of 2016 referred to annexure P-2 was dismissed/disposed of by Hon. Court on 07.09.2016 FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING ON IA 44319/2017) Date : 21-07-2017 These matters were called on for hearing today. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Priyal Jain,Adv. Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R There is a delay of six days in refiling the I.A. The delay is condoned. Registry to process the matter as per Rules. RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Registrar