SRI ATIBAL SINGH vs PRAMOD SHANKAR UPADHYAY — C.A. No. 3695/2007
Case under Section III-A. Status: DISPOSED.
CNR: SCIN010293442006
Filing Date
13-Nov-2006
Registration No
C.A. No. 3695/2007
Diary Number
29344/2006
Order Date
21-Aug-2019
Document Type
ROP - of Main Case
Disposal Type
Disposed Off
Data as of 02-Jul-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SRI ATIBAL SINGH
Adv. VARINDER KUMAR SHARMA[P-1]
Respondent(s)
PRAMOD SHANKAR UPADHYAY
Adv. ARDHENDUMAULI KUMAR PRASAD (Dead / Retired / Elevated) [R-9] ARDHENDUMAULI KUMAR PRASAD (Dead / Retired / Elevated) [R-11] ARDHENDUMAULI KUMAR PRASAD (Dead / Retired / Elevated) [R-33] ARDHENDUMAULI KUMAR PRASAD (Dead / Retired / Elevated) [R-37] ARDHENDUMAULI KUMAR PRASAD (Dead / Retired / Elevated) [R-52] ARDHENDUMAULI KUMAR PRASAD (Dead / Retired / Elevated) [R-58] GAURAV DHINGRA[R-25] ARDHENDUMAULI KUMAR PRASAD (Dead / Retired / Elevated) [R-8] ARDHENDUMAULI KUMAR PRASAD (Dead / Retired / Elevated) [R-7] P. V. YOGESWARAN[R-14] SHRISH KUMAR MISRA (Dead / Retired / Elevated) [R-10] PUNEET TANEJA (Dead / Retired / Elevated) [R-1] H. S. PARIHAR[R-1] RAMESHWAR PRASAD GOYAL[R-1] SHAIL KUMAR DWIVEDI[R-1] PRAGATI NEEKHRA[R-1] TARA CHANDRA SHARMA (Dead / Retired / Elevated) [R-1] GAURAV DHINGRA[R-23]
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.R. GAVAI
Fixed Date by Court
Fixed Date by Court
Fixed Date by Court
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 21-Aug-2019 | Fixed Date by Court |
| 20-Aug-2019 | Fixed Date by Court |
| 14-Aug-2019 | Fixed Date by Court |
| 07-Aug-2019 | Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week |
| 06-Aug-2019 | Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week |
Orders in this case
Case Summary: Sri Atibal Singh v. Pramod Shankar Upadhyay Outcome: The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's impugned judgment and remitted the matter back to the High Court for fresh consideration. The Court found the High Court had acted improperly by proceeding with a writ petition despite knowing the Supreme Court had reserved judgment on a related special leave petition, and by granting reliefs that were never prayed for in the original petition. Next Steps: The High Court was directed to decide the matter afresh within six months. Parties were permitted to approach the Chief Justice to consolidate similar matters pending at Allahabad and Lucknow benches. All contempt petitions were disposed of, allowing incumbents to challenge orders through appropriate legal forums if aggrieved. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts