A. Swapna (Cdr.) vs Union of India

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

DELHI HIGH COURT
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, AMIT BANSAL
A. Swapna (Cdr.) – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent

Table of Content
1. filing of counter affidavit. (Para 1)
2. urgency and grounds for permanent commission. (Para 2 , 4)
3. issue of urgency due to impending superannuation. (Para 3)
4. hearing on interim relief. (Para 5)
5. concerns over interim order implications. (Para 6)
6. legal precedent on interim orders. (Para 7)
7. regulations on permanent commission. (Para 8)
8. arguments for and against interim stay. (Para 9 , 10)
9. court's limitations on granting interim relief. (Para 11 , 12 , 13)
10. conclusion and dismissal of interim relief request. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)

ORDER

[VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING]

1. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents Indian Navy.

2. The counsel for the petitioner states that he is ready to argue the petition.

3. The issues entailed in the petition are required to be heard at length and which is not possible, owing to the impending superannuation of one of us (Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J.).

4. The counsel for the petitioner expresses urgency. It is contended that the petitioner was inducted as a Short Service Commission (SSC) officer in the respondents Indian Navy and her maximum tenure of SSC, of 14 years, is due to lapse on 5th August, 20

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

DELHI HIGH COURTRAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, AMIT BANSALA. Swapna (Cdr.) – AppellantVersusUnion of India – Respondent

DELHI HIGH COURT
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, AMIT BANSAL
A. Swapna (Cdr.) – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent