SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Del) 949

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Rajiv Shakdher, Talwant Singh, JJ.
Hemlata Mathur & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Union Of India & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Writ Petition No. 5960 of 2020
Decided On : 26-10-2021

Advocates appeared:
Arun Bhardwaj, Advocate, Jagjit Singh, Advocate, Rajeshwar Singh, Advocate

The court has the authority to set aside an impugned order and direct the implementation of a judgment from another court if the circumstances warrant it.

Headnote:

Judgment - Implementation of Rajasthan High Court Judgment - The court directed the respondents to implement the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court and set aside the impugned order.

Fact of the Case:

The respondents sought accommodation to obtain instructions regarding the issue raised in the writ petition, which was covered by a judgment of the Rajasthan High Court. The respondents confirmed that the judgment had been implemented and that the petitioners' case was no different from those involved in the matter decided by the Rajasthan High Court.

Finding of the Court:

The court set aside the impugned order and directed the respondents to implement the Rajasthan High Court judgment for the petitioners. The court decided not to remit the matter to the Tribunal based on the stand taken by the respondents' counsel.

Issues: Accommodation sought by respondents, implementation of Rajasthan High Court judgment, remittance to the Tribunal

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court had been implemented and that the petitioners' case was similar to the one decided by the Rajasthan High Court, leading to the decision to set aside the impugned order and direct implementation of the judgment for the petitioners.

Final Decision: The impugned order was set aside, and the respondents were directed to implement the Rajasthan High Court judgment for the petitioners. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.

JUDGMENT

Rajiv Shakdher, J. - On the previous date i.e., 04.10.2021, the following had been recorded by us:-

    " 1. Counsel for the respondents seek accommodation in the matter to obtain instructions as to, whether the issue raised in the instant writ petition is covered by the judgment dated 22.02.2021, passed by the Rajasthan High Court, in W.P.(C.) No.20910/2019; an aspect, which is, also referred to, in our order dated 27.08.2021.

    2.We may also point out that, Mr. Nikhil Bhardwaj, learned counsel for the petitioners, seeks to place reliance on paragraph 12 of the counter-affidavit filed by respondents, to demonstrate that, even according to the respondents, the issue raised in the instant petition was identical to the one, which was raised before the Division Bench of the Rajasthan High court.

    2.1. It is also contended by Mr. Bhardwaj that, the aforementioned decision of the Rajasthan High Court, has already been implemented by the respondents.

    2.2. The aforesaid aspects will be examined on the next date of hearing.

    3. List the matter on 26.10.2021".

    2. Mr. Jagjit Singh, who appears on behalf of the respondents, has reverted with instructions.

    2.1 Mr. Singh confirms, in no uncertain terms, that the judgment dated 22.02.2021, passed by the Rajasthan High Court in W.P.(C.) No.20910/2019 has been implemented qua persons, who are parties to the said case.

    2.2 Mr. Singh, on being queried, also confirms that the petitioners case is no different from those, who were involved in the matter which was decided by the Rajasthan High Court.

    2.3 Although, Mr. Singh says that, the instant matter should be remitted to the Central Administrative Tribunal [in short "the Tribunal"], in our view, no purpose would be served in remitting the matter, at this stage, to the Tribunal, in view of the stand taken before us, by Mr. Singh, albeit, on instructions.

    3. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 05.09.2016 is set aside.

    3.1 The respondents are directed to implement the aforementioned judgment of the Rajasthan High Court qua the petitioners in the instant matter, as well.

    3.2. Needless to add, the respondents will act due expedition, though not later than six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order passed today.

    4. The writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

    5. The parties will act based on the digitally signed copy of the order.

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top