Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2017 Supreme(SC) 215

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS)
Kurian Joseph and R. Banumathi, JJ.
Uttar Pradesh State Industrial Development Corporation Limited and Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Arun Kumar Mishra and Ors. - Respondents
Civil Appeal No.3831 of 2017 (Arising From Special Leave Petition (C) No. 1773 of 2017) With Civil Appeal No. 3832 of 2017, (Arising From Special Leave Petition (C) No. 2941 of 2017), and Civil Appeal No. 3833 of 2017, (Arising From Special Leave Petition (C) No.37981 of 2016)
Decided On : 07-03-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Parties : P.S. Patwalia, ASG, M.R. Shamshad, Rajat Singh, Aditya Samaddar, Ms. Harshita Deshwal, Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv., Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv., Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv., Kartik Seth, Devansh Mohta, Vikas Upadhyay, V.K. Gupta, Sr. Adv., Ms. Ruchira Gupta, Ms. Mona Sinha, Ms. Swati Jain, Anurag Sharma, Shishir Deshpande, Advs.

The Supreme Court has the authority to remit a matter to the writ court for final disposal and can issue directions regarding the disposal of the writ petition, including the operation of interim orders.

Headnote:
Interim Order - Appellants - The Supreme Court remitted the matter to the writ court for final disposal and substituted the interim order passed by the High Court. The High Court was requested to dispose of the writ petition expeditiously and untrammeled by any previous observations or findings. The interim order passed by the Supreme Court will continue to operate until the writ petition is disposed of. The Supreme Court did not consider the merits of the matter and left all contentions of the parties open.
Fact of the Case:

The appellants were aggrieved by the interim order passed by the High Court and approached the Supreme Court for relief. The Supreme Court remitted the matter to the writ court for final disposal and substituted the interim order passed by the High Court.
Finding of the Court:

The Supreme Court requested the High Court to dispose of the writ petition expeditiously and untrammeled by any previous observations or findings. The interim order passed by the Supreme Court will continue to operate until the writ petition is disposed of. The Supreme Court did not consider the merits of the matter and left all contentions of the parties open.
Issues: The issues revolved around the interim order passed by the High Court and the request for final disposal of the writ petition by the Supreme Court.
Ratio Decidendi: The Supreme Court remitted the matter to the writ court for final disposal, requested the High Court to dispose of the writ petition expeditiously and untrammeled by any previous observations or findings, and clarified that the interim order passed by the Supreme Court will continue to operate until the writ petition is disposed of.
Final Decision: The appeals were disposed of, and pending application(s), if any, were also disposed of. There were no orders as to costs.

JUDGMENT

Kurian, J. - Leave granted.

2. The appellants are before us, aggrieved by the interim order passed by the High Court dated 19.12.2016 passed in Writ Petition No.28986 of 2016.

3. As we propose to remit the matter to the writ court for final disposal, it is not proper or necessary to discuss the merits of the matter. Suffice to note that this Court after hearing the arguments extensively, on 21.02.2017, passed the following order:-

"It is not in dispute that Mr. A.K. Mishra, the petitioner in SLP(C) No.37981 of 2016, is in charge only in respect of nine revenue divisions as of now. As far as the remaining nine revenue divisions are concerned, without prejudice to the contentions available to either side, for the time being, the duties assigned to the 8th Respondent may be discharged either by the Managing Director or by the Joint Managing Director, until further orders.

List on 01.03.2017 for further hearing."

4. The said order will stand substituted in the place of interim order passed by the High Court.

5. We request the High Court to dispose of the writ petition expeditiously and preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

6. Needless to say that the High Court will dispose of the writ petition untrammeled by any of the observations or findings rendered by the High Court in the interim order. All contentions of the parties are left open, including the contention on maintainability of the writ petition, in view of the order passed by this Court in C.A. No.11151/2016 on 23.11.2016. Till the writ petition is disposed of, the interim order passed by this Court will continue to operate.

7. We also make it clear that we have not considered the merits of the matter and it is entirely for the High Court to dispose of the writ petition on its own merits.

8. The appeals are disposed of, as above.

9. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

10. There shall be no orders as to costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document