← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/26472/2016dismissed

Lajpat Rai v. Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh & ORS

2016-12-22Mr. Justice Surinder Gupta,Mrs Justice Daya Chaudhary2 pages

-1CWP No.26472 of 2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No.26472 of 2016 Date of decision: 22.12.2016 Lajpat Rai ....Petitioner

Versus

Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN Present: - Mr. R.K. Malik, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Mandeep Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (ORAL) The prayer in this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the interim order dated 07.10.2016 (Annexure P-4) and for restoration of the order dated 03.08.2016 (Annexure P-3), during the pendency of the Original Application (for short 'O.A.') before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (for short 'the Tribunal'). 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the submissions which were urged before the Tribunal and made efforts to persuade this Court to grant interim stay regarding promotion to Indian Administrative Ravinder Singh 2017.01.09 12:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

-2CWP No.26472 of 2016 Services.

3.

The perusal of impugned order (Annexure P-4) shows that while vacating the interim order, the Tribunal had categorically recorded that selection and appointment to the post in question would continue but the same shall be subject to final outcome of the O.A., which is pending before the Tribunal. It was not disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner that O.A. is pending for 24.01.2017.

4.

In view of the above, we do not find any justification to interfere with the interim order passed by the Tribunal. 5.

Dismissed.

6.

Anything observed hereinabove shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the controversy. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE (RAMENDRA JAIN) December 22, 2016 JUDGE R.S.

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Ravinder Singh 2017.01.09 12:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document