AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
C. Hari Shankar, J
CAV 603/2024
Mr. Anukul Raj, Advocate, has entered appearance on behalf of respondent.
The caveat stands discharged.
CM APPL. 72496-98/2024 (Ex.)
Exemptions allowed subject to all just exceptions.
Applications stand disposed of.
W.P.(C) 17103/2024 AND CM APPL. 72495/2024
This writ petition assails an ad interim order dated 14 August 2024 in OA 3183/20241.
After some hearing, Mr. Rajappa, learned Counsel for petitioner is agreeable to withdraw this writ petition subject to caveats which we are inclined to grant. Mr. Rajappa also confirms that petitioner has complied with para 6 of the impugned order and has filed the reply to the OA. Rejoinder, if any, may be filed by the respondent before the next date of hearing.
Mr. Anukul Raj, learned Counsel for respondent, is also in agreement with the order that we propose to pass.
Accordingly, we decline to interfere with the impugned order but clarify as under:
On the next date of hearing, the Tribunal is requested either to take up the OA for decision or, in the event that the OA cannot be heard finally, hear both parties on the issue of whether the impugned interim order should be continued further or not. As we have not gone into the merits of the matter, we are not expressing any opinion in that regard and the matter would be left entirely to the discretion of the Tribunal.
The observations contained in the impugned order which are merely ad interim in nature, needless to say, would not bind the Tribunal either at the stage of hearing on the aspect of the interim relief or at the stage of final hearing of OA.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
Footnotes
- 1.Dr Arvind Kumar v KVS & others