AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Advocates
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Advocates
Judges

    Ravindrasingh Ganoosingh Fatani & 5 Petitioner(S) v. Union Of India & 2 (S)

    COMMON ORAL ORDER

    1. Heard Mr. Parekh, learned advocate for the petitioners and Mr. Karnavat, learned advocate for respondents No. 1 to 3.

    2. Today at the time of hearing, Mr. Karnavat, learned advocate for the respondents fairly submitted that the petitioners' assertion that information about pendency of the petition was conveyed to the concerned officer is factually right and the petitioners had informed the concerned officer.

    3. Mr. Karnavat, learned advocate for the respondent union, on instructions from Mr. S.K Charan and Mr. A.P Mishra as well as after receiving instructions from the higher authority at Mumbai, submitted, inter alia, that the respondent authority is ready to and will restore the status quo ante, for the purpose of further hearing of present petition however, the respondent authority will need at least two weeks time to restore the status quo ante.

    4. With the clarification that the restoration of status quo ante will not prejudice, in any manner, the defence of the respondent authority and the justification by the respondent authority in support of the action of not accepting the petitioner's request and/or in support of its decision impugned in the petition will be considered on merits on the next date of hearing and with further clarification that the fact that the respondent authority has restored the status quo ante will not stand in way of the respondent in raising all contentions available in law, time for restoration of status quo ante as requested for by learned advocate for the respondent is granted.

    5. The respondent will do needful to restore the status quo ante by 17.9.2014

    6. The hearing of the petition is adjourned to 18.9.2014

    7. It is again clarified that the aforesaid restoration of status-quo ante is without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the respondent authority and it will not create any fresh or additional equity in favour of the petitioners.

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Ravindrasingh Ganoosingh Fatani & 5 Petitioner(S) v. Union Of India & 2 (S)
    (Sep 5, 2014)