Satish Chandra Verma vs Union of India

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(SC) 1661

K. M. JOSEPH, HRISHIKESH ROY
Satish Chandra Verma – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
Mr. I. H. Syed, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Divyesh Pratap Singh, Advocate, Mr. Sarim Naved, Advocate, Mr. Vikram Pratap Singh, Advocate, Mr. Kamran Javed, Advocate, Mr. Imraz Alam, Advocate, Ms. Ishita Alam, Advocate, Ms. Ranjana Singh, Advocate, Mr. Ajay Prabu, Advocate, Mr. Tushar Mehta, SG., Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Ronak Karanpuria, Advocate, Mr. Rajat Nair, Advocate, Mr. Piyush Gaur, Advocate, Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate, Ms. Gauraan, Advocate, Mr. Tushar Mehta, SG., Mr. Arun Bhardwaj, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Saurabh Pandey, Advocate, Mr. Madhav Sinhal, Advocate, Mr. Rohit Khare, Advocate, Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate, Mr. Subhranshu Padhi, Advocate, Ms. Vanshaja Shukla, Advocate, Mr. T. S. Sabarish, Advocate, Mr. Rajat Nair, Advocate, Ms. Manisha Lavkumar, Sr. Advocate, Ms. Deepanwita Priyanka, Advocate, Counsel for the appearing parties.

ORDER

SLP (C) Nos. 17265-17266/2022

1. Having heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner, we are not inclined to interfere with the order of the High Court refusing to extend the order of stay of the disciplinary action taken against the petitioner.

2. We note that the impugned order is an interim order but, at the same time, having heard the learned senior counsel, we are of the view that the impugned order must be modified to facilitate earlier disposal of the writ petition. Accordingly, we direct that W.P. (C)No. 10539/2021 shall stand listed before the High Court on 22.11.2022. The pleadings are to be completed by the parties well before 22.11.2022. We request the High Court to dispose of the matter as early as possible preferably within a period of three months from 22.11.2022.

3. We make it abundantly clear that we must not be treated as having expressed any opinion on the merits of the contentions of either party.

4. The special leave petitions stand disposed of.

SLP (C) No. 16419/2021

It is submitted by the learned Solicitor General and the learned senior counsel that the matter has become infructuous. The special leave petition is disposed of as infructuous.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2022 Supreme(SC) 1661

K. M. JOSEPH, HRISHIKESH ROYSatish Chandra Verma – AppellantVersusUnion of India – Respondent

K. M. JOSEPH, HRISHIKESH ROY
Satish Chandra Verma – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent