Hare Krishna Yadav v. The Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9929 of 2015 ====================================================== Hare Krishna Yadav Son of Late Jagdambi Yadav, Resident of Mohallah - Priyadarshi Nagar, D.P.S. More, P.S. - Rupaspur, Town & District - Patna (Bihar).

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Micro, Small & Medicum Enterprises, Government of India, New Delhi.

2. Kadhi & Village Industies Commission, 3, Irla Road, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai - 400056 through its the Chief Executive Officer.

3. The Deputy Chief Executive Officer (EZ), K.V.I, 33, Chittaranjan Avenue, Kolkata - 700012.

4. The Director (Administration) Kadhi & Villaeg Industries Commission, 3, IRLA Road, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai - 400056.

5. The Chief Vigilance Officer, Kadhi & Villae Industries Commission, 3 IRLA Road, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai -400056.

6. The State Director, Khadi & Village Industries Commision, Bihar State Officer, Sheikhpura, P.O. - B.V. College, Patna - 800014.

7. Smt,. Birla Mahor, Enquiry, Assistant Director (KC), Kadhi & Village Industires Commission, 3, IRLA Road, Vile Parle (West) Mumbai - 400056.

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, Adv Fro the U.O.I : Mr. S.D. Sanjay, (Addl. Soc. Gen.) & Mr. Renuka Sharma, C.G.C For the K.V.I.C : Mr. Dharmendra Chaubey, Adv ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORAL JUDGMENT 10-07-2015 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Having regard to the fact that the petitioner's appeal against the impugned order of punishment is said to be pending ever since 26.09.2014, this Court would direct the competent appellate authority to ensure that the appeal of the petitioner, if not disposed of as yet,

Patna High Court CWJC No.9929 of 2015 (2) dt.10-07-2015 must be disposed of within a period of three months, from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

The prayer for Interim relief being sought for stay of the impugned order of punishment however cannot be allowed by this Court because if appeal of petitioner is pending, it was always or even now open for the petitioner to approach the appellate authority even for an interim relief of stay.

With the aforementioned observation and direction, this application is disposed of.

(Mihir Kumar Jha, J) Ranjan/- U