1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 10692 OF 2011 HARYANA STATE & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS DILBAGH SINGH (DECEASED) THR. LRS. Respondent(s) O R D E R The respondent (now deceased) was terminated by the Milk Commissioner, Haryana vide order dated 25.09.1989 on the pretext that his services were no longer required. The respondent challenged the order by filing a civil suit seeking declaration and asking for consequential reliefs. The said suit was decreed by the trial court on 03.09.1991 inter alia on the ground that the order of termination, which is having civil consequences, could not have been passed without observing the principles of natural justice. The Court further directed for reinstatement of the respondent with full back wages and all consequential benefits. The
2 Judgment passed by the trial court has been confirmed by the First Appellate Court as well as by the High Court. Being aggrieved the State of Haryana is in appeal before us. The appellant died on 08.04.2019 and his legal heirs are now contesting this appeal. On perusal of the record of this appeal, it is revealed that on 25.02.2011, limited notice was issued confined to the question of payment of back wages. Therefore, this Court was primarily of the opinion on the initial date of hearing that the order of reinstatement was not to be faulted, but the issue of back wages only has to be adjudicated. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The respondent was terminated in September, 1989. The suit was decreed in 1991. The appellant was reinstated on 21.07.2011 and attained the age of superannuation in 2015. Therefore, considering the said aspects, we modify the decree of grant of full back wages and reduce it to that of 50% backwages while maintaining the Decree of reinstatement.
3 In view of the aforesaid, this appeal is allowed in part. The decree of the Court below is modified to the extent indicated above. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, is/are disposed of. …….........................J. [ J. K. MAHESHWARI ] ……….......................J. [ K. V. VISWANATHAN ] New Delhi; OCTOBER 12, 2023.
4 ITEM NO.105 COURT NO.11 SECTION IV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 10692/2011 HARYANA STATE & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS DILBAGH SINGH (DECEASED) THR. LRS. Respondent(s) Date : 12-10-2023 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.K. MAHESHWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN For Appellant(s) Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, A.A.G. Mr. Amit Pandey, Adv. Mr. Samar Vijay Singh, AOR Mr. Keshav Mittal, Adv. Ms. Sabarni Som, Adv. Mr. Aman Dev Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) Dr. Aditya Sondhi, Sr. Adv. Dr. Suresh Kumar, Adv. Ms. Meghna T. M., Adv. Ms. Aishwaya S. M., Adv. Mr. Naresh Kumar, AOR Mr. Satyendra Kumar, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, is/are disposed of. (JAYANT KUMAR ARORA) (VIRENDER SINGH) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS BRANCH OFFICER (Signed order is placed on the file)
ITEM NO.114 COURT NO.13 SECTION IV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 10692/2011 HARYANA STATE & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS DILBAGH SINGH (DECEASED) THR. LRS. Respondent(s) Date : 05-10-2023 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.K. MAHESHWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN For Appellant(s) Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Samar Vijay Singh, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Naresh Kumar, AOR Mr. Suvesh Kumar, Adv. Ms. Amrita Verma, Adv. Mr. Satyendra Kumar, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R A short adjournment has been sought for by learned counsel for the respondents due to non-availability of Ms. Priya Hingorani, learned senior counsel. Re-list next week. (JAYANT KUMAR ARORA) (VIRENDER SINGH) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS BRANCH OFFICER
ITEM NO.109 COURT NO.13 SECTION IV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No. 10692/2011 HARYANA STATE & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS DILBAGH SINGH (DECEASED) THR. LRS. Respondent(s) Date : 26-07-2023 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.K. MAHESHWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN For Appellant(s) Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, A.A.G. Mr. Samar Vijay Singh, AOR Mr. Keshav Mittal, Adv. Ms. Sabarni Som, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Satyendra Kumar, AOR Mr. Sandeep Malik, Adv. Mr. Ravi Prakash, AOR Mr. Suvesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Naresh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Lokendra Kumar, Adv. Mr. Vikas, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Mr. Sandeep Malik, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of Mr. Ravi Prakash, learned Advocate on Record, made a prayer to discharge as a counsel for the respondent. As the respondent has died and on behalf of the legal representatives, Mr. Suvesh Kumar, learned counsel, appears, who undertakes to file vakalatnama within three weeks, therefore, the previous Advocate on Record-Mr. Ravi Prakash is discharged. The counsel is permitted to file vakalatnama within three weeks. Amended memo be filed by the appellants within three weeks. List after four weeks. (NIDHI AHUJA) (VIRENDER SINGH) AR-cum-PS BRANCH OFFICER
ITEM NO.105 COURT NO.15 SECTION IV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No. 10692/2011 HARYANA STATE & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS DILBAGH SINGH (DECEASED) THR. LRS. Respondent(s) Date : 10-05-2023 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.K. MAHESHWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH For Appellant(s) Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, A.A.G. Mr. Samar Vijay Singh, AOR Mr. Keshav Mittal, Adv. Ms. Amrita Verma, Adv. Ms. Sabarni Som, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Satyendra Kumar, AOR Mr. Sandeep Malik, Adv. Ms. Shweta Jain, Adv. Mr. Shailendra Kumar Nirmal, Adv. Mr. Inderjeet Singh, Adv. Mr. Ravi Prakash, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Learned counsel appearing for the respondents pleads instructions. In view of the statement made, let fresh notice be issued to the respondents, who are legal heirs/representatives of the deceased – Dilbagh Singh, returnable in six weeks. (DEEPAK GUGLANI) (R.S. NARAYANAN) AR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
ITEM NO.17 COURT NO.12 SECTION IV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No(s). 10692/2011 HARYANA STATE & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS DILBAGH SINGH (DECEASED) Respondent(s) (List Application for substitution (123804/2019) alongwith application for condonation of delay in filing substitution application (123805/2019) in this appeal. IA No. 123804/2019 - APPLICATION FOR SUBSTITUTION IA No. 123805/2019 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING SUBSTITUTION APPLN.) Date : 09-12-2019 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY [IN CHAMBER] For Appellant(s) Mr. Sanjay Kumar Visen, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms.Roopa Paul,Adv. Mr.H.L. Chumber,Adv. Ms.Khyati Jain,Adv. Dr.Sat Narain,Adv. Mr. Satyendra Kumar, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay in filing the application for substitution is condoned. Application for substitution to bring on record the Lrs. of deceased sole respondent is allowed. Amended cause title be filed accordingly. (SUSHMA KUMARI BAJAJ) (R.S. NARAYANAN) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT COURT MASTER (NSH)
ITEM NO.4 COURT NO.1 SECTION IV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS I.A.No.58253/2019 in Civil Appeal No(s).10692/2011 HARYANA STATE & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS DILBAGH SINGH Respondent(s) (For early hearing) Date : 19-07-2019 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE For Appellant(s) Mr. Rajesh K. Singh,Adv. Mr. Vikas Pritam,Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Visen,AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. H.L. Chumber,Adv. Ms. Roopa paul,Adv. Mr. Satyendra Kumar,AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List in the month of October, 2019, before appropriate Bench. Application for early hearing is disposed of. (Anand Prakash) (Sarita Purohit) Branch Officer AR-cum-PS
ITEM NO.147 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION IV 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 M K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 10692/2011 HARYANA STATE TH.COLLECTOR, KARNAL & ANR Appellant(s) VERSUS DILBAGH SINGH Respondent(s) Date : 13/03/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr.Rajesh K.Singh,adv. Mr. Devashish Bharuka,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr.Devendra Jha,adv. Mr. Satyendra Kumar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The office report is that Ld.counsel for the appellants and the Ld.counsel for the respondent have failed to file the statement of case, although they have been notified to do so by letter dated 10.05.2012 of this Registry. Order XIX Rule 32 of the Supreme Court Rules,2013 provides that if the appellant does not file a statement of case within the time, as provided for in sub rule (1), it shall be presumed that the appellant has adopted the list of dates/synopsis containing chronology of events as filed at the time of presentation of petition for seeking special leave to appeal(SLP)/appeal, as statement of case,and does not desire to file any further statement of case. The order further provides that if the respondent has entered appearance and does not file a statement of case within the time, as provided in Sub Rule(1) (i.e. 35 days) it shall be presumed that he does not desire to lodge the same. … ......2
ITEM NO.147 -2- In view of the rule position cited above, the matter shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court under the rules. (M K HANJURA) Registrar SB
¨ ITEM NO.147 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION IV 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 M K HANJURA Civil Appeal No(s). 10692/2011 HARYANA STATE TH.COLLECTOR, KARNAL & ANR Appellant(s) VERSUS DILBAGH SINGH Respondent(s) Date : 13/03/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr.Rajesh K.Singh,adv. Mr. Devashish Bharuka,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr.Devendra Jha,adv. Mr. Satyendra Kumar,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The office report is that Ld.counsel for the appellants and the Ld.counsel for the respondent have failed to file the statement of case, although they have been notified to do so by letter dated 10.05.2012 of this Registry. Order XIX Rule 32 of the Supreme Court Rules,2013 provides that if the appellant does not file a statement of case within the time, as provided for in sub rule (1), it shall be presumed that the appellant has adopted the list of dates/synopsis containing chronology of events as filed at the time of presentation of petition for seeking special leave to appeal(SLP)/appeal, as statement of case,and does not desire to file any further statement of case. The order further provides that if theSignature Not Verified respondent has entered appearance and does not file a statement of case within the time, as provided in Sub Rule(1) (i.e.Digitally signed bySushma Kumari BajajDate: 2015.03.1412:52:51 ISTReason: 35 days) it shall be presumed that he does not desire to lodge the same. .........2ITEM NO.147 -2- In view of the rule position cited above, the matter shallbe processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court under the rules. (M K HANJURA)
RegistrarSB
TITEM NO.55 COURT NO.4 SECTION IVB S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.6813/2011(From the judgment and order dated 20/08/2010 in RSANo.1613/1992 of The HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA ATCHANDIGARH)HARYANA STATE TH.COLLECTOR, KARNAL & ANR Petitioner(s) VERSUSDILBAGH SINGH Respondent(s)(With prayer for interim relief and office report)Date: 28/11/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.K. JAIN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVEFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Alok Sangwan, Adv. Mr. Devashish Bharuka,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. S.C. Paul, Adv. Mr. Resham Singh, Adv. Ms. Satwinder Kaur, Adv. Ms. Roopa Paul, Adv. Ms. Rajeeta Raj, Adv. Mr. Satyendra Kumar,Adv.-on-record UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted. The appeal will be heard on the SLP Paper Book. Additional documents, if any, may be filed by the parties. Ad interim order dated 25th February, 2011 is made absolute till the disposal of the appeal. (VINOD LAKHINA) (KUSUM GULATI) Court Master Court Master
nITEM NO. 51 COURT NO.4 SECTION IVB S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).6813/2011(From the judgement and order dated 20/08/2010 in RSANo.1613/1992 of The HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH)HARYANA STATE TH.COLLECTOR, KARNAL & ANR Petitioner(s) VERSUSDILBAGH SINGH Respondent(s)(With prayer for interim relief and office report)Date: 29/08/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.K. JAIN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASOK KUMAR GANGULYFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Alok Sangwan, Adv. Mr. Devashish Bharuka,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. S.C. Paul, Adv. Mr. Satwant Singh Munde, Adv. Mr. Mohinder Singh, Adv. Mr. Ashok Kumar, Adv. Mr. Satyendra Kumar,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent had been reinstated on 21st July, 2011. He, however, prays for time to file rejoinder affidavit to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent, on 20th August, 2011. Let the needful be done within four weeks. List thereafter. [ Charanjeet Kaur ] [ Kusum Gulati ] Court Master Court Master
ITEM NO. 63 COURT NO.5 SECTION IVB S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.6813/2011(From the judgement and order dated 20/08/2010 in RSA No.1613/1992 of The HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH)HARYANA STATE TH.COLLECTOR, KARNAL & ANR Petitioner(s) VERSUSDILBAGH SINGH Respondent(s)(With prayer for interim relief and office report )Date: 11/07/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.K. JAIN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASOK KUMAR GANGULYFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Alok Sangwan, Adv. Mr. Devashish Bharuka,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. S.C. Paul, Adv. Ms. Roopa Paul, Adv. Mr. Satwinder Kaur, Adv. Mr. Ashok Kumar, Adv. Mr. Satyendra Kumar,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Some more time is sought on behalf of the respondent to file counter affidavit. Let the needful be done within four weeks. Rejoinder affidavit, if necessary, may be filed within two weeks thereafter. List thereafter. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners prays for some time to seek instructions as to whether the respondent has been reinstated in service or not. We direct that in case the respondent has not yet been reinstated, he will be taken back into service within two weeks from today, failing which, the Director General, Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Haryana shall be present in Court in person to enable us to make appropriate orders in the matter.(VINOD LAKHINA) (KUSUM GULATI) Court Master Court Master
ÖITEM NO. 9 COURT NO.5 SECTION IVB S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2011 CC 2631/2011(From the judgement and order dated 20/08/2010 in RSA No.1613/1992 of The HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH)HARYANA STATE TH.COLLECTOR, KARNAL & ANR Petitioner(s) VERSUSDILBAGH SINGH Respondent(s)WITH I.A. No. 1(C/Delay in filing SLP)Date: 25/02/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.K. JAIN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.L. DATTUFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Gopal Subramanium, S.G. Mr. Alok Sangwan, Adv. Mr. Devashish Bharuka,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. S.C. Paul, Adv.rr.1 Ms. Satwinder Kaur, Adv. Mr. S.S Munde, Adv. Ms. Roopa Paul, Adv. Mr. Satyendra Kumar,Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Issue notice confined to the question of payment of back wages. Mr. Satyendra Kumar, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 1. In the meantime, the operation of the impugned judgment, to the extent of payment of back wages, shall remain stayed. [ Charanjeet Kaur ] [ Kusum Gulati ] Court Master Court Master