AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ms. Usha Singh, Advocate for the appellant stated that all the respondents have been served and affidavit of service of notice on respondents has also been filed.
I.A. No.509/2024 (application for condonation of delay filed by appellant)
The instant application is filed to condone the delay in filing the present appeal. Although the number of days of delay has not been mentioned in the application, Ms. Usha Singh, the counsel for the appellant stated that there is a delay of 76 days in filing the present appeal. After considering all facts, the delay of 76 days in foiling the present appeal is condoned. Accordingly, the application is allowed.
The S.A. applicants Asha Bhasin and others filed S.A. bearing No.80/2023 before DRT-II, Chandigarh in which the appellant was impleaded as respondents no.1 and 2. DRT-II, Chandigarh vide order dated 18.1.2024 on the basis of suggestion of the Registrar-in-charge containing in order dated 03.11.2023 closed the right of the appellants (respondents 1 and 2 before DRT) to file reply. The order dated 18.01.2024 is reproduced as under:-
In view of the suggestion of the Registrar-in-charge of this Tribunal contained in order dated 03.11.2023, right to file reply in respect of respondents 1 and 2 is closed. So, the reply filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 shall not be taken cognisance of. Reply to the SA has been filed on behalf of respondent No.3. Now, replication be filed to the reply filed on behalf of respondent no.3. To come up on 27.11.2024 for arguments.
The perusal of the order dated 18.01.2024 passed by the Registrar-in-charge, DRT-II, Chandigarh reflects that on 03.11.2023, the counsel for the SA applicant raised objection with regard to the filing of reply to the SA by the appellants (respondents 1 and 2) as it was stated to be filed after the stipulated time. S.A. was ordered to be listed before the Presiding Officer on 07.12.2023 for further proceedings.
It is surprising to note that DRT-II, Chandigarh vide impugned order dated 18.01.2024 merely on the basis of suggestion of Registrar-in-charge contained in order dated 03.11.2023 closed the right of the appellant (respondents 1 and 2) to file reply without giving any judicial finding that reply on behalf of the appellant (respondents 1 and 2) was filed beyond the stipulated period. The impugned order dated 18.01.2024 reflects complete absence of judicial mind on the part of the Presiding Officer, DRT-II, Chandigarh. DRT-II, Chandigarh on judicial and legal principles should have passed the order without considering the suggestion given by the Registrar-in-charge of DRT as per order dated 03.11.2023. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 18.01.2024 is set aside with a direction to the DRT-II, Chandigarh to take a fresh decision about the timeline for filing of the reply of appellant (respondents 1 and 2) and whether the reply was filed within the stipulated time or beyond and pass appropriate order. The appeal is decided accordingly.
The parties are directed to appear before the DRT-II, Chandigarh on 20.07.2026 when the matter is stated to be listed for further proceedings.
Copy of this order be sent to the DRT-II, Chandigarh for information and compliance.