[see rule 11(1)] order sheet court no. 3 m.a. no. 1514 of 2014 …aftlko.up.nic.in/c3 daily...

Form No. 4 [See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET

ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW

Court No. 3

M.A. No. 1514 of 2014

Mohd Rasool Applicant

By Legal Practitioner for Applicant

Versus

Union of India & Others Respondents

By Legal Practitioner for Respondents

Notes of the

Registry

Orders of the Tribunal

07.11.2014

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Abdul Mateen, Member (J)

Hon’ble Lt. Gen. A.M. Verma, Member (A)

Present: Shri V.P. Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, and Smt.

Deepti P. Bajpai, learned counsel for the respondents, along with Capt. Priti

Tyagi, Departmental Representative.

This Misc. Application moved by the applicant for condoning the

delay in filing the Original Application.

As per office report, there is delay of 07 months and 04 days in filing

the Original Application.

Learned counsel for the respondents prays for and is granted two

weeks’ time to file objection on the delay condonation application.

List on 10.12.2014 before the appropriate Court having jurisdiction,

as per roster.

(Lt. Gen A.M. Verma) (Justice Abdul Mateen)

Member (A) Member (J) RP.


ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 70 of 2010

Jagadisha H.G. Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


07.11.2014



Present: Shri KC Ghildiyal, learned counsel for the applicant,

and Capt. Priti Tyagi, Departmental Representative.

Arguments concluded.

Judgment reserved.


Member (A) Member (J)

RP.


ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 129 of 2013

Rajendra Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


07.11.2014



Present: Shri V.P. Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, and

Smt. Deepti P. Bajpai, learned counsel for the respondents, along with

Capt. Priti Tyagi, Departmental Representative.

Shri V.P. Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant requested

some more time to incorporate the amendment. As requested, two

days time is granted to incorporate the necessary amendment.

List on 11.12.2014 before the appropriate Court having

jurisdiction, as per roster.



RP.


ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 202 of 2012

Vijay Kant Shukla Applicant


Versus

Chief of the Army & Others Respondents


Notes of the

Registry


07.11.2014



Present: Capt. Priti Tyagi, Departmental Representative.

On call of the case Shri Vinay Pandey, advocate appeared and

stated that Shri P.N. Chaturvedi, counsel for the applicant has gone

out of station and has not come to this Court today. He, therefore,

prays for adjournment of the case. Accordingly, the case is adjourned

for the day.

As prayed, list on 30.1.2015 before the appropriate Court

having jurisdiction, as per roster.



RP.


ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 435 of 2012

Islam Khan Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


07.11.2014



Present: Shri P.K. Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, and

Smt. Deepti P. Bajpai, learned counsel for the respondents, along with


On call of the case, Shri P.K. Shukla appeared and stated that

he has not prepared the brief of the case and requested for

adjournment. Accordingly, the case is adjourned for the day.





RP.


ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 520 of 2012

Narendra Pal Singh Applicant


Versus

Chief of the Army & Others Respondents


Notes of the

Registry


07.11.2014








for the day.





RP.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 89 of 2009

Rajendra Prasad Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


07.11.2014








for the day.





RP.


ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 1290 of 2010

Arvind Kumar Katiyar Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


07.11.2014



Present: Shri MS Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, and

Shri Mukund Tewari, learned counsel for the respondents, along with

Sgt SK Pandey, Departmental Representative.

Heard Shri MS Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant as well

as Shri Mukund Tewari, learned counsel for the respondents.

Applicant counsel is directed to file Synopsis in Registry today to

argue the case further.


jurisdiction, as per roster. It shall not be treated as tied up to this

Court.



RP.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 63 of 2012

Sanjay Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


07.11.2014








for the day.





RP.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 309 of 2012

Jaivind Singh Applicant


Versus

Chief of Army Staff & Others Respondents


Notes of the

Registry


05.11.2014



Dismissed.

For judgment and order see our judgment and order of date

passed on separate sheets.



PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 369 of 2012

Gurwinder Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


05.11.2014



Allowed.

For judgment and order see our judgment and order of date

passed on separate sheets.



PG.


ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

M.A. No. 1512 of 2014

SS Sandhu Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


05.11.2014




On call of the case Shri Rajveer Singh, Advocate, appeared and

stated that Shri P.S. Sisodia, learned counsel for the applicant, has not

come to this Court today. He, therefore, prays for adjournment of the

case. Accordingly, the case is adjourned for the day.





PG.

Form No. 4 [See rule 11(1)] ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

M.A. No. 1511 of 2014

(Inre: M.A. No. 1404 of 2014 & O.A. No. 47 of 2014)

Hardev Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


05.11.2014



Present: Shri Vikas Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicant,

and Capt. Priti Tyagi, Departmental Representative.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant on this Misc. Application

No. 1511 of 2014 for recall of the order dated 27.10.2014 dismissing M.A.

No. 1404 of 2014 and O.A. No. 47 of 2013 for non-prosecution.

The reasons shown in the affidavit accompanying the recall

application appears to be genuine. Accordingly, the application is allowed

and the order dated 27.10.2014 dismissing M.A. No. 1404 of 2014 and O.A.

No. 47 of 2013 is recalled and they are restored to its original number on the

condition that the applicant shall deposit Rs. 500/- as cost in the A.F.T. Bar

Association within a week.

If the amount is deposited within time, list this case on 13.11.2014

before the appropriate Court having jurisdiction, as per roster.

.



PG.


ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

M.A. No. 1513 of 2014

(Inre: T.A. No. 58 of 2013)

P Raghavan Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


05.11.2014



Present: Shri Rajeev Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, and

Shri Mukund Tewari, learned counsel for the respondents, along with Capt.

Priti Tyagi, Departmental Representative.

Heard learned counsel for the parties on this Misc. Application No.

1513 of 2014 for recall of the order dated 10.10.2014 dismissing M.A. No.

1028 of 2014 and T.A. No. 58 of 2013 for non-prosecution.

The reasons shown in the affidavit accompanying the recall

application appears to be genuine. Accordingly, the application is allowed

and the order dated 10.10.2014 is hereby recalled. Misc. Application No.

1028 of 2014 and T.A. No. 58 of 2013 are restored to its original number on

the condition that the applicant shall deposit Rs. 500/- as cost in the A.F.T.

Bar Association within a week.

If the amount is deposited within time, list this case on 27.11.2014

before the appropriate Court having jurisdiction, as per roster.



PG.


ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

Dy. No. 1639 of 2014 with M.A. No. 1346 of 2014

Manoj Kumar Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


05.11.2014



Present: Shri Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the

applicant, and Shri Mukund Tewari, learned counsel for the

respondents, along with Capt. Priti Tyagi, Departmental

Representative.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant on the application for

condoning the delay in moving the Original Application.

Shri Mukund Tewari, learned counsel for the respondents,

prays for and is granted three weeks’ time to file objection.





PG.



Court No. 3

EX-A. No. 1 of 2014 with M.A. No. 1508 of 2014

(Inre: T.A. No. 858 of 2010)

Madhukar Kalu Jadhav Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


05.11.2014



Present: Shri R. Chandra, learned counsel for the applicant, and Ms.

Deepti Prasad Bajpai, learned counsel for the respondents, along with Capt.

Priti Tyagi, Departmental Representative.

In this Execution Application the respondents have filed compliance

report, being Misc. Application No. 1508 of 2014, supported with an

affidavit of Major Sachin Nimbalkar and from Annexure ‘1’ of the affidavit

it comes out that although P.P.O. has been issued to the applicant in

pursuance of the judgment and order of this Tribunal dated 17.7.2013 passed

in T.A. no. 858 of 2010 but it is not clear as to whether all the payments

have been made to the applicant in pursuance of the aforesaid judgment and

order. The respondents are directed to file a detailed affidavit as to whether

P.P.O. has been issued to the applicant and all the payments have been made

to the applicant or not.

List on 25.11.2014. before the appropriate Court having jurisdiction,

as per roster.



PG.



Court No. 3

EX-A. No. 6 of 2014

(Inre: T.A. No. 94 of 2009)

Sayed Shahid Ali Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


05.11.2014



Present: Shri Man Mohan Bose, learned counsel for the applicant, and

Shri D.S. Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondents, along with Capt. Priti


In the present case learned counsel for the respondents states that the

compliance report has been filed before the Registry of this Court after

serving a copy of the same on learned counsel for the applicant wherein it

has been mentioned, as stated by learned counsel for the respondents, that

the judgment and order dated 13.8.2013, passed by this Tribunal in T.A. No.

94 of 2009 has been complied with.

Learned counsel for the applicant is directed to inform this Court

within three weeks as to whether the aforesaid judgment and order has been

fully complied with or not

As prayed, list on 2.12.2014 before the appropriate Court having




PG.


ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

EX-A. No. 10 of 2014

(Inre: T.A. No. 1002 of 2010 with M.A. No. 799 of 2014)

Shri Nath Shukla Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


05.11.2014



Present: Shri Mukund Tewari, learned counsel for the


Representative.

On call of the case Col. R.N. Singh, Advocate, appeared and

informed this Court that Shri P.N. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the

applicant, has gone out of station. He, therefore, prays for adjournment

of the case.

Although in this Execution Application Shri Mukund Tewari,

learned counsel for the respondents, states that the papers sent to the

applicant has returned back with the endorsement of the Post Office

that the applicant is not available at the address and he has gone out of

station for treatment.

The respondents are directed to send the papers again to the

applicant within two weeks and the applicant shall return the papers to

the respondents, after duly complying the directions given therein, at

the earliest for early implementation of the judgment and order of this

Tribunal dated 23.8.2013 passed in T.A. No. 1002 of 2010.





PG.


ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

EX-A. No. 35 of 2014

(Inre: O.A. No. 226 of 2013 & EX.A. No 115 of 2013)

Ram Pal Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


05.11.2014



Present: Shri S.K. Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, and



Shri S.K. Singh stated that the judgment and order dated

8.10.2012, passed by this Tribunal in T.A. No. 1484 of 2010 has been

complied with

On the basis of statement made by learned counsel for the

applicant, this Execution Application No. 35 of 2014 is rendered

infructuous. It is, accordingly, dismissed as infructuous.



PG.


ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 37 of 2012 with M.A. No. 1040 of 2014 & M.A. No. 1361 of 2014

Salil Chandra Jagdev Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


05.11.2014



Present: Shri V.A. Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, and


On call of the case Shri V.A. Singh, learned counsel for the

applicant, stated that though the amendment has been incorporated but

he could not file the amended copies of the O.A. He states that the

amended copies of the O.A. will be filed today in the office. He may

do so during the course of the day.





PG.


ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 1337 of 2010

Shailendra Kumar Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


05.11.2014



Present: Shri Prakhar Kankan, learned counsel for the


Representative.

On call of the case Shri Vinit Sharma, Advocate, appeared and

stated that his senior Shri S.P. Singh, learned counsel for the applicant,

has not come to this Court today due to sad demise in his family. He,

therefore, prays for adjournment of the case. Accordingly, the case is

adjourned for the day.





PG.


ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 107 of 2012

Sukhbir Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


05.11.2014



Present: Shri R. Chandra, learned counsel for the applicant, and

Shri Prakhar Kankan, learned counsel for the respondents, along with


Learned counsel for the respondents prays for and is granted

further two weeks and no more time to deposit the cost of Rs. 5,000/-,

imposed on the respondents and to be paid to the applicant, as ordered

by this Court on 21.7.2014 and 28.10.2014.





PG.


ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 159 of 2011

Dev Pal Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


05.11.2014



Present: Shri K.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, and


On call of the case Shri K.K. Mishra appeared but failed to

inform the Court as to whether the Original Application has been

admitted or not, though this case has been listed for hearing. Shri

Mishra prays for time to go through the record of the Court and to

inform the Court whether or not this O.A. has been admitted.





PG.


ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 72 of 2013

Kalu Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


05.11.2014




On call of the case Shri V.P. Pandey, Advocate, appeared and

stated that Shri Nishant Verma, learned counsel for the applicant, has

gone out of station. He, therefore, prays for adjournment of the case.

Accordingly, the case is adjourned for the day.





PG.


ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 150 of 2010

Devi Sharan Mishra Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


05.11.2014




On call of the case a person claiming himself to be Devi Saran

Mishra, applicant, appeared and stated that his counsel Shri P.N.

Chaturvedi has gone out of station and has not come to this Court

today. He, therefore, prays for adjournment of the case. Accordingly,

the case is adjourned for the day.





PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 159 of 2010

Pratap Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


05.11.2014



Present: Shri K.K.Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, and



List this case on 27.1.2015 along with T.A. No. 94 of 2009 and

T.A. No. 63 of 2010 before the appropriate Court having jurisdiction,

as per roster. On the next date the respondents shall produce original

GCM record, as ordered by this Court on 2.4.2013.



PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 351 of 2010

H.B. Singh Applicant

In person

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


05.11.2014





Representative.

On call of the case one Pavneet Yadav claiming himself to be

the son of the applicant, appeared and stated that the case may kindly

be adjourned. Accordingly the case is adjourned for the day.





PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 31 of 2012

Shatrughan Singh Chauhan Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


05.11.2014



Present: Shri V.A. Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, and



List this case on 7.1.2015 before the appropriate Court having

jurisdiction, as per roster. On the next date, the respondents shall

produce the record pertaining to SGCM proceedings with statement

of witnesses produced against the applicant and also the statements of

defence witnesses produced by the applicant. The applicant is also

directed to bring on record copies of the Summary of Evidence as well

as other statements of defence and prosecution witnesses by the next

date.



PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 06 of 2014

Sepoy Ramesh Prasad Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


03.11.2014



Present: Shri ……, learned counsel for the applicant, and Shri

…., learned counsel for the respondents, along with Capt. Priti Tyagi,

Departmental Representative.





PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

DY. No. 1559 of 2014

Keshar Bahadur Tamang Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


03.11.2014



Present: Shri ……, learned counsel for the applicant, and Shri

…., learned counsel for the respondents, along with Capt. Priti Tyagi,






PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 06 of 2014

Sepoy Ramesh Prasad Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


03.11.2014



Present: Shri Yash Pal Singh, learned counsel for the applicant,

and Ms. Deepti Prasad Bajpai, learned counsel for the respondents,

along with Capt. Priti Tyagi, Departmental Representative.

On call of the case learned counsel for the applicant states that

he has not yet been able to move an amendment application. He,

therefore, prays that some more time be granted to him to file

amendment application. As prayed, three weeks’ further time is

granted to learned counsel for the applicant to move amendment

application.

Ms. Deepti Prasad Bajpai, learned counsel for the respondents,

states that she is also not in possession of the file since this matter has

come on transfer to this Regional Bench of the Tribunal at Lucknow

from Jharkhand High Court to Kolkata Bench of this Tribunal and

thereafter transferred to this Regional Bench by the order of the

Principal Bench of this Tribunal. Ms. Deepti Prasad Bajpai prays for

certified copies of the file.

Office is directed to provide certified copies of the file to Ms.

Deepti Prasad Bajpai, learned counsel for the respondents, within four

weeks.





PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

DY. No. 1559 of 2014

Keshar Bahadur Tamang Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


03.11.2014



Present: Shri Yash Pal Singh, learned counsel for the applicant,

and Ms. Deepti Prasad Bajpai, S/Shri Mukund Tewari & Prakhar

Kankan, learned counsel for the respondents, along with Capt. Priti


Learned counsel for the applicant states that he has not yet been

handed over the photo-copies of the SCM proceedings.

On the last date, i.e. on 30.9.2014, Shri Mukund Tewari,

learned Standing Counsel, appeared for the respondents and on that

date we had directed Shri Tewari to provide photo-copies of the entire

SCM proceedings to Shri Yash Pal Singh, learned counsel for the

applicant, who has been appointed as Amicus Curiae by the order of

this Court dated 10.9.2014, to prepare the case.

Shri Mukund Tewari, learned Standing Counsel, prays for and

is granted further three weeks’ time and no more to supply photo-

copies of the entire SCM proceedings to Shri Yash Pal Singh, relating

to the applicant No. 9420878M, Rifleman Keshar Bahadur Tamang.





PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

EX-A. No. 06 of 2014

(Inre: T.A. No. 94 of 2009)

Sayed Shahid Ali Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


03.11.2014



Present: Shri D.S. Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondents,


On call of the case no one appears for the applicant. On the

contrary Shri D.S. Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondents, states

that the judgment and order under execution has been complied with

in toto and he intends to file an affidavit in this regard. He, therefore,

prays for and is granted two days’ time to file affidavit indicating

therein that the judgment and order dated 13.8.2013, passed by this

Tribunal in T.A. No.94 of 2009 has been complied with in toto.

List on 5.11.2014.



PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

M.A. No. 1064 of 2013

Nil Kant Gain Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


03.11.2014



Present: Shri Mukund Tiwari, learned counsel for the


Representative.

List has been revised. No one appears for the applicant, neither

there is any request to adjourn/pass over the case.

Accordingly, Misc. Application No. 1064 of 2013 is dismissed

for non-prosecution.



PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

M.A. No. 497 of 2014 with M.A. No. 1186 of 2014

Vijay Kumar Mandal Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


03.11.2014



Present: Lt. Col. A.K. Saxena along with Shri Rakesh Johri,

learned counsel for the applicant, and Ms. Deepti Prasad Bajpai,

learned counsel for the respondents, along with Capt. Priti Tyagi,


Heard learned counsel for the parties on this Misc. Application

No. 497 of 2014.

This is an application for condoning the delay in filing the

Original Application relating to SCM.

As per office report this O.A. has been filed delayed by 4 yers,

9 months and 15 days.

The grounds taken in the affidavit filed along with the delay

condonation application appears to be general in nature and have been

made in a very capricious manner without there being any evidence in

support of it. Objection has been field by the respondents on the delay

condonation application.

In the aforesaid circumstances, we are unable to condone the

delay, after having found the grounds taken by the applicant for

condoning the delay as insufficient and seem to be not genuine.

Accordingly, Misc. Application No. 497 of 2014, for condoning the

delay in filing the O.A., is hereby rejected.

Since the application for condoning the delay has been rejected,

the Original Application is accordingly dismissed.



PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 16 of 2010

Brij Kishor Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


03.11.2014



Present: Shri B.P.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the


Representative.

On call of the case Shri Mohd. T. Khan, Advocate, appeared

and stated that Shri M.K. Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, has

not come to this Court today. He, therefore, prays for adjournment of

the case. Accordingly, the case is adjourned for the day.





PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 138 of 2011

V.K. Rai Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


03.11.2014



Present: Shri Dileep Singh, learned counsel for the respondents,


List has been revised. No one appears for the applicant, neither

there is any request to adjourn/pass over the case.

Accordingly, this Original Application No. 138 of 2011 is

dismissed for non-prosecution.



PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

O.A. No. 302 of 2011

Brijendra Kumar Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


03.11.2014



Present: Shri P.N. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the applicant,

and Shri Prakhar Kankan, learned counsel for the respondents, along

with Capt. Priti Tyagi, Departmental Representative.

Shri Chaturvedi prays for and is granted four weeks’ time to

file amendment application to amend the Original Application since

the point taken in the supplementary affidavit cannot be treated as

amendment in the Original Application.

Meanwhile, on going through the order-sheets of the file, we

find that this case has not yet been admitted, though it has been listed

for hearing.

As prayed, list on 12.1.2015 for admission before the

appropriate Court having jurisdiction, as per roster.



PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 603 of 2010

Rajendra Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


03.11.2014




On call of the case Shri V.K. Pandey, Advocate, appeared and

stated that Shri P.K. Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, could

not come to this Court today. Shri Pandey, therefore, prays for

adjournment of the case. Accordingly, the case is adjourned for the

day.

Meanwhile, on going through the order-sheets of the file, we

find that this case has not yet been admitted, though it has been listed

for hearing.

As prayed, list on 13.1.2015 for admission before the

appropriate Court having jurisdiction, as per roster.



PG.

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET


Court No. 3

T.A. No. 1204 of 2010

T Kishan Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


03.11.2014





Representative.

A request has been made Shri Ashwani Kumar, Advocate, for

adjournment of the case since Shri Pradeep Chandra, learned counsel

for the applicant, could not come to this Court today. Accordingly, the

case is adjourned for the day.

However, after going through the order-sheets we find that this

case has not yet been admitted, though it has been listed for hearing.

List this case on 13.1.2015 for admission before the appropriate

Court having jurisdiction, as per roster.



PG.

[see rule 11(1)] order sheet court no. 3 m.a. no. 1514 of 2014 …aftlko.up.nic.in/c3 daily...

Documents