NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.3010 OF 2016 (Arising out of SLP(C)No.7877/2016 @ CC 8344/2015) PUDA (NOW) GREATER LUDHIANA AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (GLADA) ... APPELLANT(S) VS. MANDEEP SINGH & ANR. ... RESPONDENT(S) J U D G M E N T ANIL R. DAVE, J. 1. Delay condoned. 2. Leave granted. 3. Mr. Subhro Sanyal, learned Advocate-on-Record, has appeared on caveat for Respondent No.1. 4. Respondent No.2, being proforma party, stands deleted from the array of parties. 5. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the respondent has already been reinstated. 6. Upon hearing the concerned parties and looking at the peculiar facts of the case, we feel that 40% of back-wages ought not to have been awarded. Therefore, we direct that Rs.1.5 lakhs (Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand only) in lump sum shall be paid by the appellant to Respondent No.1. The said amount shall be paid in lieu of the back-wages. 1
7. By virtue of the afore-stated modification of the impugned judgment, the appeal is partly allowed. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ..............J. [ANIL R. DAVE] ..............J. [ADARSH KUMAR GOEL] New Delhi; 11 th March, 2016. 2
ITEM NO.8 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.7877/2016 (CC No(s).8344/2015) (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 19/12/2014 in LPA No.289/2014 passed by the High Court Of Punjab & Haryana At Chandigarh) PUDA (NOW) GREATER LUDHIANA AREA DEV.AUTH.(GLADA) Petitioner(s) VERSUS MANDEEP SINGH & ANR. Respondent(s) (With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing SLP) Date : 11/03/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL For Petitioner(s) Mrs. Rachana Joshi Issar,Adv. Ms. Mariya Mumtaz Hashmi,Adv. Ms. Tanya Sharma,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Jigyash Tanwar,Adv. Mr. Subhro Sanyal,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Leave granted. The appeal is partly allowed in terms of signed Non-reportable judgment. (Sarita Purohit) (Sneh Bala Mehra) Court Master Assistant Registrar (Signed Non-reportable judgment is placed on the file) 3
MATTER FOR: 11.03.2016 COURT NO. 2 ITEM NO. 8 SECTION-XV IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERLOCTORY APPLICATION NO. 1 (Application for condonation of delay in filing SLP) CC No. 8344 of 2015 PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CIVIL) NO. WITH PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIEF PUDA (NOW) GREATER LUDHIANA AREA ...PETITIONERS DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (GLADA) VERSUS MANDEEP SINGH & ANR. ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT It is submitted that the Office Report on Default in the matter above mentioned was listed before the Hon'ble Judge-in-Chamber on 26.02.2016, when the following order was passed:- “Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he has already served the petition on the Caveator. He is directed to file proof of service in the Registry.” It is submitted for information of the Honb'le Court that counsel for the petitioner has filed application for condonation of delay in filing SLP which is barred by time by 8 days. It is further submitted that counsel for the Petitioner has served the copy of the petition on the Caveator and filed proof of service. The matter above mentioned is listed before the Hon'ble Court with this Office Report. Dated this the 08 th day of March, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to : 1. Mr. Rachana Joshi Issar, Adv. 2. Mr. Subhro Sangal, Adv. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 1/sk/F.OR.
T! NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.3010 OF 2016 (Arising out of SLP(C)No.7877/2016 @ CC 8344/2015) PUDA (NOW) GREATER LUDHIANA AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (GLADA) ... APPELLANT(S) VS. MANDEEP SINGH & ANR. ... RESPONDENT(S) J U D G M E N T ANIL R. DAVE, J. 1. Delay condoned. 2. Leave granted. 3. Mr. Subhro Sanyal, learned Advocate-on-Record, has appeared on caveat for Respondent No.1. 4. Respondent No.2, being proforma party, stands deleted from the array of parties. 5. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the respondent has already been reinstated. 6. Upon hearing the concerned parties and looking at the peculiar facts of the case, we feel that 40% of back-wages ought not to have been awarded. Therefore, we direct that Rs.1.5 lakhs (Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand only) in lumpSignature Not Verified sum shall be paid by the appellant to Respondent No.1. TheDigitally signed by ANITAMALHOTRA said amount shall be paid in lieu of the back-wages.Date: 2016.03.17 16:46:28ISTReason: DSC of Ms. AnitaMalhotra, CM is used bysarita purohit, CM for signing 17. By virtue of the afore-stated modification of theimpugned judgment, the appeal is partly allowed. Pendingapplication, if any, stands disposed of. There shall be no
order as to costs. ..............J. [ANIL R. DAVE] ..............J. [ADARSH KUMAR GOEL]New Delhi;11th March, 2016. 2ITEM NO.8 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 PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)No.7877/2016 (CC No(s).8344/2015)(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 19/12/2014in LPA No.289/2014 passed by the High Court Of Punjab & Haryana AtChandigarh)PUDA (NOW) GREATER LUDHIANA AREA DEV.AUTH.(GLADA) Petitioner(s) VERSUSMANDEEP SINGH & ANR. Respondent(s)(With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing SLP)Date : 11/03/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOELFor Petitioner(s) Mrs. Rachana Joshi Issar,Adv. Ms. Mariya Mumtaz Hashmi,Adv. Ms. Tanya Sharma,Adv.For Respondent(s) Ms. Jigyash Tanwar,Adv. Mr. Subhro Sanyal,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Leave granted. The appeal is partly allowed in terms of signed Non-reportable judgment. (Sarita Purohit) (Sneh Bala Mehra) Court Master Assistant Registrar (Signed Non-reportable judgment is placed on the file)
3
ITEM NO.42 COURT NO.8 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)......CC No(s). 8344/2015 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 19/12/2014 in LPA No. 289/2014 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh) PUDA (NOW) GREATER LUDHIANA AREA DEVELOPMENT (GLADA)Petitioner(s) VERSUS MANDEEP SINGH & ANR. Respondent(s) (Office report on default) Date : 26/02/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA [IN CHAMBER] For Petitioner(s) Mrs. Rachana Joshi Issar,Adv. Ms. Sangeeta Rai, Adv. Mfr. Tanmaya Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Subhro Sanyal,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he has already served the petition on the Caveator. He is directed to file proof of service in the Registry. (USHA BHARDWAJ) (S.S.R. KRISHNA) AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER
0ITEM NO.42 COURT NO.8 SECTION XV 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 (C)......CC No(s). 8344/2015(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 19/12/2014in LPA No. 289/2014 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana atChandigarh)PUDA (NOW) GREATER LUDHIANA AREA DEVELOPMENT (GLADA)Petitioner(s) VERSUSMANDEEP SINGH & ANR. Respondent(s)(Office report on default)Date : 26/02/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA [IN CHAMBER]For Petitioner(s) Mrs. Rachana Joshi Issar,Adv. Ms. Sangeeta Rai, Adv. Mfr. Tanmaya Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Subhro Sanyal,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RLearned counsel for the petitioner states that he hasalready served the petition on the Caveator. He is directed tofile proof of service in the Registry.(USHA BHARDWAJ) (S.S.R. KRISHNA) AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER