School Of Planning Architecture v. Dr Umesh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment Delivered On: 04.11.2020 LPA 279/2020 & CM APPL.24669/2020 (Interim Directions) SCHOOL OF PLANNING ARCHITECTURE ..... Appellant versus DR UMESH ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Appellant :
Mr. Raj Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent :
Dr. Ashwini Bhardwaj, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH
J U D G M E N T
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J. (Open Court - via Video Conferencing) The present matter has been taken up for hearing by way of Video Conferencing on account of COVID-19 pandemic 1.
The present Letters Patent Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent Appeal assails the interim order dated 16.09.2020, passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) 6149/2020, titled as 'Dr. Umesh vs. School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi', whereby the appellant herein was essentially directed not to
discontinue the services of the respondent herein, the original petitioner, till the next date of hearing i.e. 19.11.2020. 2.
Having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties, the only course of action that commends itself to us is to request the learned Single Judge to expedite the adjudication of the subject writ petition and dispose of the same, preferably within a period of three months from the next date of hearing, without granting any unwarranted adjournments to the parties.
3.
Dr. Ashwini Bhardwaj, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent undertakes to file the affidavit in rejoinder to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the appellant in the said writ petition with an advance copy to counsel appearing on the other side, within one week from today.
4.
Directed accordingly.
5.
Dr. Ashwini Bhardwaj, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent further states that he has instituted an application seeking amendment of the writ petition, owing to the averments made on behalf of the appellant in the counter affidavit. 6.
The learned Single Judge may adjudicate the said application, in accordance with law.
7.
No further directions are called for.
8.
With the above directions, the appeal is disposed of. The pending application also stands disposed of.
9.
Needless to state that, we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
10.
A copy of this judgment be provided electronically to counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and be also uploaded on the website of this Court.
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL (JUDGE) TALWANT SINGH (JUDGE) NOVEMBER 04, 2020 dn Click here to check corrigendum, if any