P.C. Misra v. Union Of India & ORS

$~31 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 10763/2016 P.C. MISRA ..... Petitioner Through:

Petitioner in person versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Manish Mohan, CGSC with Mr.

Shivam Chanana, Advocates for respondent Nos.1 and 2 Mr. Ankur Chibber, Advocate for respondent Nos.4 and 5

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

O R D E R

% 15.11.2016 We have heard Mr. P.C. Mishra, who appears in person and perused the impugned order dated 21st September, 2016. The grievance of the petitioner is that his original application ('OA') No.100/712/2016 and miscellaneous application ('MA') No.2812/2016 for grant of interim relief is not being heard.

The impugned order rejects MA No.1187/2016 for early hearing on the ground that the OA and interim application were fixed for hearing on 19th October, 2016.

There is nothing wrong with the impugned order dismissing the miscellaneous application, which would warrant interference by the writ Court.

The petitioner submits that the OA No.100/712/2016 and MA No.1187/2016 were not heard on 19th October, 2016 and on the subsequent date fixed, i.e., 3rd November, 2016 and have been now listed on 8th December, 2016.

It is open to the petitioner to press for early hearing and disposal of the OA and the interim application on the next date of hearing. Learned counsel for the respondents, who are present on advance notice, state that they will not seek adjournment in the matter. In fact, learned counsel for the respondents state that the petitioner has filed another application, seeking more details and information and this is a reason and cause why the hearing of the OA and the miscellaneous application for interim relief were adjourned. As these facts are not pleaded, we are not examining and commenting on them.

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is dismissed. SANJIV KHANNA, J CHANDER SHEKHAR, J NOVEMBER 15, 2016 Tp