University of Delhi vs Shashi Kiran

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(SC) 438

UDAY UMESH LALIT, VINEET SARAN
University of Delhi – Appellant
Versus
Shashi Kiran – Respondent

Advocate Appeared:
Mohinder Jit Singh, Aman Sinha, Sanjai Kumar Pathak, Arvind Kumar Tripathi, Nupoor Sinha, Shashi Pathak, K.K. Rai, Shiv Kumar Pandey, Sreoshi Chatterjee, Chandrashekhar A. Chakalabbi, Awanish Kumar, Anshul Rai, Abhinav Garg, D. Girish Kumar, Kumar Vinayakam Gupta, Vikas Kumar, Manish Paliwal Devmani Bansal, Ajay Monga, Himanshu Menghani, Satyajit S. Desai, Satyakam Sharma, Siddharth Gautam, Anagha S. Desai, Tanuj Khurana, Anjali Chauhan, Nar Hari Singh, Swetank Shantanu, Ankit Kumar, Ravi S. Chauhan, Shefali Jain, Rajesh Prasad Singh, Sujeeta Srivastava, Arjun Harkauli, Aditya Ranjan, Satpal Singh, D. S. Chauhan, Rahul Pratap, Gurmeet Singh Makker, Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, Romy Chacko, Arvind Kumar Gupta, Vikas Mehta, Jagjit Singh Chhabra, Santosh Kumar - I, Mayank Goel, M/s. UNUC Legal LLP, Advocates

Table of Content
1. factual basis for appeals by university of delhi. (Para 2 , 3)
2. context of extended options under cpf and gpf. (Para 4)
3. arguments regarding option exercise and employee choices. (Para 5 , 10)
4. court's analysis of extensions and options. (Para 11 , 12 , 20)
5. equitable considerations regarding employee switches. (Para 21 , 22)
6. final decision on appeals with remittance directions. (Para 26)

JUDGMENT :

Uday Umesh Lalit, J.

Delay condoned. Leave granted.

2. These appeals by the University of Delhi ('the University', for short) are directed against the judgment and order dated 24.08.2016 passed by the Division Bench of High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Letters Patent Appeals¹[LPA Nos. 410-414, 416-418, 558, 594, 667, 672 and 780 of 2014; 554, 606, 607, 608, 609, 610, 615, 616, 617, 618, 619, 622, 623, 624, 625, 626, 627, 628, 629, 632, 633, 635, 636, 637, 638, 639, 640, 641, 642, 643, 644, 645, 646, 647, 648, 650, 651, 653, 654, 655 of 2014 and other connected appeals] which in turn had challenged the decisions of the learned Single Judge of the High Court dated 30.04.2014 in various Writ Petitions²[Writ Petition No. 1490 of 2006 and connected matters, Writ Petiti

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2022 Supreme(SC) 438

UDAY UMESH LALIT, VINEET SARANUniversity of Delhi – AppellantVersusShashi Kiran – Respondent

UDAY UMESH LALIT, VINEET SARAN
University of Delhi – Appellant
Versus
Shashi Kiran – Respondent