Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
D.N. Patel, Jyoti Singh, JJ.
Airports Authority of India - Appellant
Versus
Air Traffic Safety Electronics Personnel Association (India) - Respondent
LPA 288 of 2020 & CM Appls. 25065 of 2020 (interim directions), 25067 of 2020 (delay)
Decided On : 08-02-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. grounds for the appeal (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments for expediting hearing (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. court's observations on appeal timing (Para 4 , 6) |
| 4. conclusion and order for hearing (Para 5 , 7) |
JUDGMENT
D.N. Patel, Chief Justice (Oral)
Proceedings have been conducted through video conferencing.
1. Being aggrieved and feeling dissatisfied by the interim order dated 25th August, 2020 passed by the Learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) 2011/2020, the original Respondent No.1 has preferred the present Letters Patent Appeal.
2. We have heard learned counsels for the parties and looked into the facts and circumstances of the case. It is submitted by learned counsel for Respondent No.1 that the pleadings are complete in the writ petition before the Learned Single Judge and the petition is now listed on 15.02.2022. He further submits that Respondent No.2 has already preferred an application before the Learned Single Judge for modification of the interim order dated 25.08.2020, which is impugned in the present appeal. Since the petition is ripe for hearing, it is urged that no purpose will be served in keeping the appeal pending.
3. Learned counsel for the Appellant agrees that the pleadings are complete in the writ petition but submits that since an interim order is operating against the Appellant, a direction be given to the Learned Single Judge for expediting the hearing in the writ petition.
4. We agree with the learned counsel for Respondent No.1 that since the present appeal is only against an interim order and the pleadings are now complete in the writ petition, no purpose will be served in keeping the present appeal pending. Needless to state that the judgment of the Learned Single Judge will, in any case, give rise to a fresh cause of action and parties will have their remedies in law.
5. We, therefore, dispose of the appeal and request the learned Single Judge to expedite the hearing of W.P.(C) No. 2011/2020.
6. Learned counsels for the parties submit that they shall cooperate so that the writ petition can be disposed of at the earliest and shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment. We make it clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
7. With the aforesaid observations, the present Letters Patent Appeal is hereby disposed of along with pending applications.
An interim order can be upheld while expediting hearing in a related writ petition without addressing the substantive merits of the case.
The appellants' decision to not press their appeal permits them to challenge the final order in the ongoing writ petition if necessary, without the court expressing any opinion on the merits at this ....
Court addressed procedural delays in hearings and clarified that opinions on merits were not expressed in the disposal of the appeal.
Letters Patent Appeals are untenable if no rights or liabilities of parties are decided in the impugned order.
Interim orders allowing status quo are upheld while relevant writ petitions are pending, highlighting the principle of maintaining legal stability during ongoing proceedings.
The court's decision was based on the understanding of the predicament involved and the specific instruction given by the Counsel on record to the Junior Counsel not to argue the matter.
Denial of EWS reservation in admission violates constitutional provisions; interim orders do not finalize rights, thus appealing them lacks merit.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
