Airports Authority Of India v. Adm/Lac (South West) & ORS.

% $-11 and 12 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 4200/2013, C.M. No.9702/2016 & C.M..No.21061/2016 AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA ;;

Petitioner Through Mr.Digvijay Rai, Advocate.

versus ADM/LAC (SOUTH WEST) & ORS.

Respondents Through Mr.Yeeshu Jain, Ms.Jyoti Tyagi and Ms. Goldy, Advocates for R-1.

r ;

+ W.P.(C) 4208/2013, C.M. NO.9899/2016 & C.M. No.21062/2016 AIRPORT AUTHORIT Y OF INDIA Petitioner /F -N WThrough Mr.Digvijay Rai, Advocate.

;!

- versus ADM/LAC SOUTH WEST AND ORS :

Respondent Through Mr.Yeeshu Jain, Ms.Jyoti Tyagi arid Ms. Goldy, Advocates for R-1.

CORAM:

\ HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR O

ORDER

^ % 13.07.2016 Order impugned before this Court is the order dated 12.3.2013 passed by respondent no. 1 i.e. ADM/LA (South West). !

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the main contention of the petitioner is that this order passed by the ADM is illegal for the reason that the ADM did not have the requisite Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing.

V.

jurisdiction. It is only the ADM appointed as Nodal Officer by this. Court vide order dated 06.11.2012 who alone would have the; jurisdictipn to decide the matter in question. Learned counsel for the petitioner will abide by this statement. Learned counsel for the petitioner additionally submits that the order of the ADM has been challenged on merits as well.

In this view of the matter, this Court is of the view that this matter can be disposed of by the ADM (Nodal officer), New Delhi who has the requisite jurisdiction to decide the same. The learned ^ ADM shall decide the matter within an outer limit of three months ® from the date of receipt of this order. Needless to state that all the pleadings and arguments taken in the present petition would be available to the petitioner before the ADM (Nodal Officer). The learned ADM ^Nodal Officer), New Delhi will pass orders uninfluenced by any observations made by this Court in this order. I Petitions disposed of in the above terms.

^ INDERMEET KAUR, J % JULY 13, 2016 ndn L;