Ramakrishna Dutta v. Union Of India And ORS.

$~26.

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 1812/2018 and CM APPL. 7424-25/2018 RAMAKRISHNA DUTTA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Dinesh S. Badiar, Advocate.

versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

..... Respondents Through: Mr. Akshay Makhija, CGSC with Mr. Aditya Goyal and Mr. Seerat Singh, Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI

O R D E R

% 26.02.2018 1.

The petitioner has filed this petition praying inter alia that directions be issued to the Central Administrative Tribunal to hear and decide three connected O.As. filed by him at the earliest. 2.

We may note that prior hereto, the petitioner had approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) 10504/2017 for the same relief, which was disposed of vide order dated 27.11.2017 observing inter alia that there was no reason to interfere in the order dated 15.11.2017, passed by the Tribunal that had adjourned all the three O.A.s filed by the petitioner to 23.01.2018. 3.

On 23.01.2018, due to the heavy board of the Tribunal, the said O.As. were adjourned to 24.05.2018.

4.

Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner had filed an application in the disposed of writ petition (CM APPL. 5659/2018) for issuing directions to W.P.(C) 1812/2018

the Tribunal to advance the date of hearing. Vide order dated 13.02.2018, the said application was withdrawn by the learned counsel for the petitioner, while reserving the right of his client to seek legal recourse before the Tribunal.

5.

Instead of filing an application before the Tribunal, the petitioner has filed the present misconceived petition. We decline to entertain the present petition. The petitioner ought to have approached the Tribunal in the first instance for seeking advancement of the date of hearing. 6.

The petition is dismissed along with the pending applications. HIMA KOHLI, J PRATIBHA RANI, J FEBRUARY 26, 2018 na/ap W.P.(C) 1812/2018