form no. 4 [see rule 11(1)] order sheet armed forces ...aftlko.up.nic.in/c2 daily order/c2...

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET

ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW

Court No. 1 (List B)

M.A. No. 102 of 2017 (Inre: O.A. No. Nil of 2017)

Suresh Singh 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

18.01.2017

Hon’ble Mr. Justice D.P. Singh, Member (J)

Hon’ble Lt Gen Gyan Bhushan, Member (A)

Memo of appearance filed on behalf of respondents by Shri AN

Tripathi, Advocate is taken on record. His name be shown as counsel

for the respondents, when the case is listed next.

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

Shri AN Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondents along with Maj

Salen Xaxa, departmental representative.

M.A. No. 102 of 2017.

This is an application for condonation of delay in filing the

Original Application, which as per office report, is delayed by 10

years, 10 months and 04 days. Copy of this application has been

served upon the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents on

10.01.2017. Shri AN Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel appearing for

the respondents prays for and is granted four weeks’ time to file

objection. Replication to the objection may be filed by the learned

counsel for the applicant within two weeks, thereafter.

List this case on 25.04.2017 for admission.

(Lt Gen Gyan Bhushan) (Justice D.P. Singh)

Member (A) Member (J)

rpm/-

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET




Smt. Saroj Tiwari Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.01.2017



Memo of appearance filed on behalf of respondents by Shri

Namit Sharma, Advocate is taken on record. His name be shown as

counsel for the respondents, when the case is listed next.

Present: Shri Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the

applicant and Shri Namit Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents

along with Maj Salen Xaxa, departmental representative.

M.A. No. 103 of 2017.





16.01.2017. Shri Namit Sharma, learned Standing Counsel appearing

for the respondents prays for and is granted four weeks’ time to file


counsel for the applicant within two weeks, thereafter.




rpm/-

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET




Raja Ram Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.01.2017



Memo of appearance filed on behalf of respondents by Shri

Sidharth Dhaon, Advocate is taken on record. His name be shown as

counsel for the respondents, when the case is listed next.

Present: Shri Yashpal Singh, learned counsel for the applicant

and Shri Sidharth Dhaon, learned counsel for the respondents along

with Maj Salen Xaxa, departmental representative.

M.A. No. 104 of 2017.





17.01.2017. Shri Sidharth Dhaon, learned Standing Counsel appearing

for the respondents prays for and is granted four weeks’ time to file


counsel for the applicant within two weeks thereafter.




rpm/-

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



EX-A. No. 123 of 2016 (Inre: T.A. No. 63 of 2013)

Girish Chandra Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.01.2017



Present: Shri Sudhir Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the

applicant and Dr. Shailendra Sharma Atal, learned counsel for the

respondents along with Maj Salen Xaxa, departmental representative.

On call of the case Dr. Shailendra Sharma Atal, learned counsel

for the respondents states that matter is pending with the Ministry of

Defence. He prays for and is granted four weeks time to file compliance

report.

List this case on 21.02.2017 for orders.



rpm/-

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



M.A. No. 625 of 2016 with M.A. Nos. 1430, 1544 and 2339 of 2016

(Inre: T.A. No. 363 of 2011)

Yogendra Singh Chahal Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.01.2017



Present: Shri Rajeev Shrivastava, learned counsel for the

applicant and Shri Amit Jaiswal, learned counsel for the respondents


M.A. No. 2339 of 2016.

Reply to the objection on application for condonation of delay

filed by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. M.A.

No. 2339 of 2016 stands disposed off.

List this case on 19.04.2017 for hearing.

On the date fixed, learned counsel for the respondents shall

produce original documents pertaining to case for perusal of the

Bench.



rpm/-

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



T.A. No. 218 of 2010 with M.A. No. 2304 of 2016

Rajesh Pandey Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.01.2017



Present: Shri DK Pandey, learned counsel for the respondents


On call of the case, Shri Rajesh Pandey, petitioner states that his

counsel is out of station as such he could not file reply to the objection

on amendment application filed by the respondents. He prays for and

is granted two weeks’ further time to file reply.

List this case on 06.02.2017 for order.



rpm/-

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



EX-A. No. 208 of 2016 (Inre: T.A. No. 363 of 2011)

AK Sethi Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.01.2017



Present: Shri Rakesh Johri, learned counsel for the applicant and

Dr. Shailendra Sharma Atal, learned counsel for the respondents along


The order dated 13.8.2013 passed by the Tribunal has not yet

been complied with by the respondents, although almost two years

have been passed.

Learned counsel for the respondents prays for and is granted four

weeks further time to comply with the order dated 13.8.2013 passed

by the Tribunal, subject to payment of cost of Rs.10,000/- to be

deposited in the Registry within four weeks from today and the same

will be released in favour of the applicant by the Registry through

cheque.



Member (A) Member (J) PKG

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



O.A.24 of 2012

Smt. Diropa Devi Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.01.2017



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

Dr. Shailendra Sharma Atal, learned counsel for the respondents along


Inspite of service of notice upon respondent no.6 Smt. Poonam

Devi, no one appeared on her behalf. As such, we proceed exparte

against respondent no.6.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



O.A. No. 276 of 2013 with M.A. No. 2598 of 2016

Babu Ram Yadav Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.01.2017



Present: Shri Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the

applicant and Dr. Shailendra Sharma Atal, learned counsel for the

respondents along with Maj Salen Xaxa, departmental representative.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the entire

outstanding dues have been paid to the applicant vide circular no.568

dated 13th

October 2016.

Since the applicant has been provided with all the benefits, as

prayed for, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the matter

pending. In case the applicant does not agree with the steps taken by

the respondents, it shall be open to him to approach the Tribunal

again.

Subject to the aforesaid observations, O.A. No. 276 of 2013 is

disposed of finally.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



O.A. No. 245 of 2016

Dhirendra Nath Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.01.2017



Present: Shri Anand Saran, learned counsel for the applicant and

Shri AK Sahu, learned counsel for the respondents along with Maj

Salen Xaxa, departmental representative.


weeks’ further time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if

any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



T.A. No. 41 of 2016

Smt. Shakuntla Devi Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


18.01.2017



Memo of appearance filed by Col (Retd) YR Sharma, Advocate

on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. When the case is next

listed, his name be shown as learned counsel for the applicant.

Present: Col (Retd) YR Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant

and Shri Anurag Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents along with

Maj Salen Xaxa, departmental representative.

Learned counsel for the respondents prays for and is granted one

week’s time to file supplementary counter affidavit. Supplementary

rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within one week thereafter.




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

ORDER SHEET



M.A. No. 88 of 2017

(Inre: O.A. No. Nil of 2017)

Jeet Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


17.01.2017



Memo of appearance filed by Shri Ashish Kumar Singh,

Advocate, on behalf of the respondents is taken on record. His name be

shown as counsel for the respondents when the case is listed next.

Present: Shri OP Kushwaha, learned counsel for the applicant and

Shri Ashish Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondents alongwith

Maj Salen Xaxa, Departmental representative.

M.A. No. 88 of 2017


Original Application, which as per office report, is delayed by 32 years,

10 months and 10 days. Copy of this application has been served upon

the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents on 13.01.2017. Shri

Ashish Kumar Singh, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the

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

Replication to the objection may be filed by the learned counsel for the

application within two weeks thereafter.


( Lt Gen Gyan Bhushan) (Justice D.P. Singh)



ORDER SHEET



M.A. No. 91 of 2017


Rajesh Kumar Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


17.01.2017



Memo of appearance filed by Dr. Shailendra Sharma Atal,

Advocate, on behalf of the respondents is taken on record. His name be

shown as counsel for the respondents when the case will list next.

Present: Shri VP Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr.

Shailendra Sharma Atal, learned counsel for the respondents alongwith


M.A. No. 91 of 2017




the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents on 12.01.2017. Dr.

Shailendra Sharma Atal, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the

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

Replication to the objection may be filed by the learned counsel for the

application within two weeks thereafter.





ORDER SHEET



DY.No. No. 2573 of 2016 with M.A. No. 2546 of 2016


Ranjit Lal & Others Applicants

By Legal Practitioner for Applicants

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


17.01.2017



Present: Shri RN Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and

Shri AK Gupta, learned counsel for the respondents alongwith Maj Salen

Xaxa, Departmental representative.

M.A. No. 2546 of 2016




the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents on 27.10.2016. Shri AK

Gupta, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents prays for

and is granted six weeks’ time to file objection. Replication to the

objection may be filed by the learned counsel for the application within

two weeks thereafter.





ORDER SHEET



EX.A. No. 141 of 2016

(Inre: O.A. No. 78 of 2014)

Dinesh Pratap Singjh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


17.01.2017



Present: Shri KKS Bisht, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr.



Learned counsel for the respondents states that in compliance of

the order of this Tribunal, necessary PPO has been issued.

Accordingly, it is directed that the Bank concerned shall release

the amount to the applicant within one month from the date of production

of a certified copy of this order.

Subject to the above, this Execution Application is disposed of

accordingly.




ORDER SHEET



EX.A. No. 159 of 2016

(Inre: T.A. No. 135 of 2011)

Ravindra Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


17.01.2017






Learned counsel for the respondents states that in compliance of

the order of this Tribunal, necessary PPO has been issued.

Since the necessary PPO has been issued, the Bank concerned is

directed to release the amount to the applicant within one month from

the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

Subject to the above, this Execution Application is disposed of

accordingly.




ORDER SHEET



M.A. No. 1747 of 2016 with M.A. No. 2258 of 2016

(Inre: T.A. No. Nil of 2016)

Bishwanath Mishra Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


17.01.2017






Reply to the objection on application for condonation of delay

filed by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.





ORDER SHEET



O.A. No. 39 of 2014 with M.A. No. 2274 of 2015,

M.A. No. 2167 of 2016 and M.A. No. 2578 of 2016)

Subhash Mishra Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


17.01.2017



Present: Shri Dharmesh Sinha, learned counsel for the applicant

and Shri Rajiv Pandey, learned counsel for the respondents alongwith


M.A. No. 2578 of 2016.

Replication to supplementary affidavit filed by the applicant is

taken on record. M.A. No. 2578 of 2016 stands disposed off.

Accordingly, list this case for hearing on 12.04.2017.


Member (A) Member (J) rpm/-


ORDER SHEET



O.A. No. 56 of 2014 with M.A. No. 2344 of 2016,

Smt. Shyama Devi Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


17.01.2017



Present: Shri KK Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and

Shri Virendra Singh, learned counsel for the respondents alongwith Maj

Salen Xaxa, Departmental representative.

M.A. No. 106 of 2017.


substitution application for substituting the heirs of the deceased,

applicant Smt. Shyama Devi, which is taken on record. M.A. No. 106 of

2017 stands disposed off.

Shri Virendra Singh, learned counsel for the respondents prays for

and is granted two weeks to file replication to the application for

condonation of delay filed by the applicant.

List this case for hearing on 23.03.2017.




ORDER SHEET



O.A. No. 250 of 2016

Surinder Kumar Patyal Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


17.01.2017



Present: Shri Rajat Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant

and Shri AN Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondents alongwith Maj

Salen Xaxa, Departmental representative.

On call of the case, Shri AN Tripathi, learned counsel for the

respondents prays for and is granted two weeks’ further time to file

counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed by the

applicant within two weeks, thereafter.

List this case for hearing on 26.05.2017.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



O.A. No. 195 of 2016

Nagendra Kumar Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.01.2017



O.A. No. 195 of 2016, Nagendra Kumar Singh vs. Union of India

and others is allowed.

For order, see our order of date passed on separate sheets.


Member (A) Member (J) RPM

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



O.A. No. 21 of 2017

Om Prakash Applicant

Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.01.2017



Meme of appearance filed by Shri Arun Kumar Sahu, Advocate,

on behalf of the respondents is taken on record.

Present: Shri RN Singh and Shri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned

counsel for the applicant and Shri Arun Kumar Sahu, learned counsel for

the respondents alongwith Maj Salen Xaxa, Departmental Representative.

The instant Original Application has been filed by the applicant

claiming the following reliefs :

(A) To issue/pass an order or directions to the respondents to

dispose of the Appeal against the rejection of disability element

of the disability pension by speaking order, annexed as

Annexure No.A-1 to Appeal dated 2 Jul 2015 to this Original

Application.

(B) To issue/pass an order or directions to respondents to

supply informations as sought vide para 3(a) to 3(h) of the

letter dated 14.09.2016 (Annexure No.A-6) forwarded under

Right to Information Act, 2005 to PIO, ADG Personnel Service

(PS-4)/Imp-11, ADG Branch IHQ of MOD (Army), New Delhi-

11.

(C) To issue/pass any other order or direction as this Hon’ble

Tribunal may deem just, fit and proper under the

circumstances of the case in favour of the applicant against the

respondents.

(D) To allow this original application with costs.

The brief facts giving rise to this Original Application are that the

applicant was enrolled in the Indian Army, Corps of EME as a Recruit

on 21.08.1975 against permanent, clear and regular vacancy. After

successful completion of training, he was attested as soldier on

31.07.1976. During the course of service, the applicant completed all the

assignments entrusted to him by his superior officers. On 30.06.2003, the

applicant was discharged from service with disability viz (i) “PRIMARY

HYPERTENSION 1-100” and (ii) “OBESITYOE66.025.0” and his

disability was considered as neither attributable to nor aggravated by

Military Service with 30% disablement for life. On 30.04.2004, the

applicant’s disability claim was submitted to PCDA (P), Allahabad

(respondent no.5) by the respondent no.4, but the same was rejected by

the respondent no.5 vide order dated 18.04.2004.

Being aggrieved by the rejection order dated 18.04.2004, the

applicant preferred First Appeal on 2nd

July 2015 before the Chairman,

Appellate Committee on First Appeals (Through EME Records), which is

still pending.

Heard Shri RN Singh and Shri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned

counsel for the applicant, Shri Arun Kumar Sahu, learned counsel for the

respondents and perused the record.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that since First Appeal

is pending before the authority concerned, it shall be appropriate that the

authority concerned may decide it expeditiously. Learned counsel for the

respondents has no objection to it.

Accordingly, with the consent of the learned counsel for the

parties, we dispose of this Original Application at the admission stage,

with the direction to the authority concerned to decide the First Appeal

by a speaking and reasoned order within a period of four months from the

date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, keeping in view the law

laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of Dharamvir Singh vs. Union

of India & others reported in 2013 (7 SCC 2013) 316 and Sukhvinder

Singh vs. Union of India reported in 2014 STPL (WEB) 468 SC and

communicate the decision to the applicant.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



M.A. No. 68 of 2017 Inre Dy No. 3023 of 2016

Sombir Singh Applicant


Versus

Union of India & others Respondents


Notes of the

Registry


16.01.2017



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

Maj Salen Xaxa, Departmental Representative for the respondents.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant on the application for

recall of order dated 14.12.2016 which was dismissed for non

prosecution. Order dated 14.12.2016 is recalled subject to payment of

Rs. 500/-, to be deposited in Armed Forces Tribunal Bar Association

Library by the applicant within a period of one week. On production

of receipt of deposit, the case will be restored to its original number.



Member (A) Member (J) SB

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



O.A. No. 264 of 2016

Sushanta Kumar Bal Applicants


Versus

Union of India & others Respondents


Notes of the

Registry


16.01.2017



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

Shri Arun Kumar Sahu, learned counsel for the respondents.

The controversy relates to grant of disability pension which is

recurring cause of action.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties. We find that it is a

fit case for admission.

Admit.


weeks time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may

be filed by learned counsel for the applicant within two weeks,

thereafter.



produce original documents pertaining to the case for perusal of the

Bench.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



O.A. No. 265 of 2016

Dhan Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.01.2017



Present: None for the applicant and Ms. Appoli Shrivastava,

learned counsel for the respondents.

Since delay in filing the original application has already been

condoned and pension is recurring cause of action, we find that it is

a fit case for admission.

Admit.


weeks time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may

be filed by learned counsel for the applicant within two weeks,

thereafter.




Bench.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



O.A. No. 276 of 2016

Harish Chandra Srivastava Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.01.2017



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

Shri G.S. Sikarwar, learned counsel for the respondents.

Learned counsel for the respondents prays for and is granted two

weeks’ further time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if

any, may be filed by learned counsel for the applicant within two

weeks, thereafter.




Bench.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



M.A. No. 986 of 2013

Smt. Meera Devi Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.01.2017



Present: Shri O.P. Kushwaha, holding brief of Shri Ashok

Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Amit Jaiswal,

learned counsel for the respondents.

Learned counsel for the applicant prays for and is granted a

week’s further time to file replication to objection on application for

condonation of delay.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



M.A. No. 9 of 2016 with M.A. No. 604, 730 of 2016 & M.A. No. 57 of 2017

Rajendra Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.01.2017



Present: Shri Bachchan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant

and Shri Virendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondents.


weeks’ time to file objection on application for condonation of delay.

Replication, if any, may be filed by learned counsel for the applicant

within two weeks, thereafter.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



M.A. No. 2017 of 2016 with M.A. No. 2349 of 2016 & M.A. No. 77 of 2017

Inre O.A. No. Nil of 2016

Lt Col Narayan Singh Thapa (Retd) Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.01.2017



Present: Dr. Ashish Asthana, learned counsel for the applicant

and Shri D.K. Pandey, learned counsel for the respondents duly assisted

by Maj Salen Xaxa, Departmental Representative.

Controversy relates to payment of disability pension to the

applicant which is recurring cause of action. The reasons given in the

affidavit filed in support of the application for condonation of delay

seems to be sufficient.

The delay in filing the Original Application is hereby condoned.

Objections raised by the learned counsel for the respondents is

rejected.

Admit.

O.A. No. 22 of 2017

Learned counsel for the respondents has raised a preliminary

objection that the applicant has not availed alternate remedy by

preferring appeal to respondents raising all his grievances.

The applicant is directed to submit his statutory appeal to the

authority concerned alongwith copy of this order raising all his

grievances within a period of one month from today. If he submits his

appeal, respondents shall decide the appeal of the applicant as per law

by a speaking and reasoned order, expeditiously, say within a period

of four months from the date of receipt of appeal from the applicant

and communicate the decision to the applicant.

With the aforesaid directions, Original Application is disposed of

finally.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



M.A. No. 2562 of 2016 with M.A. No. 2563 of 2016 Inre M.A. No. 831 of 2015

Chandradhar Prasad Yadav Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.01.2017



Present: Shri Virat Anand Singh, learned counsel for the

applicant and Shri Sidharth Dhaon, learned counsel for the respondents.


weeks’ further time to file objection on application for condonation of

delay. Replication, if any, may be filed by learned counsel for the

applicant within two weeks’, thereafter.



Member (A) Member (J) ukt

Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



M.A. No. 2743 of 2016 Alongwith R.A. No. 118 of 2016 Inre T.A. No. 1142 of 2010

Munna Lal Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.01.2017



Present: Shri Lal Chandra Sahu, learned counsel for the applicant

and Maj Salen Xaxa, Departmental Representative for the respondents.

List this case on 30.01.2017 for further hearing in Court No 1

(List B).



Bench.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



T.A. No. 93 of 2016

Smt. Sushma Devi Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.01.2017



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

and Shri Namit Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents.


weeks further time to file supplementary counter affidavit clarifying

what service benefits have been paid to the petitioner after accidental

death of her husband. Replication, if any, may be filed by learned

counsel for the applicant within two weeks’ thereafter.




Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



O.A. No. 345 of 2015

Nihal Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.01.2017



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

and Dr. Shailendra Sharma Atal, learned counsel for the respondents.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Argument concluded.

Judgment reserved.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



O.A. No. 13 of 2016

Akash Singh Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.01.2017



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

Shri Amit Jaiswal, learned counsel for the respondents.

On 14.12.2016, order was passed to respondents to produce

original documents pertaining to case but the same has not been

produced. Today, learned counsel for the respondents further prays for

four weeks’ time to produce original documents. Time prayed for is

granted.


On the date fixed learned counsel for the respondents shall

produce original records pertaining to case for perusal of the Bench.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



T.A. No. 75 of 2011

Ashok Kumar Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.01.2017



Present: Shri Bachchan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant

and Dr. Shesh Narain Pandey, learned counsel for the respondents.

As prayed by learned counsel for the parties, list this case on

24.01.2017 for further hearing.


produce original records pertaining to case alongwith case law and

comparative statement for perusal of the Bench.



Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



T.A. No. 77 of 2013

Jainendra Kumar Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.01.2017



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

Shri G.S. Sikarwar, learned counsel for the respondents.

Bench copy produced by learned counsel for the applicant is

taken on record.

As prayed by learned counsel for the respondents, list this case on

17.01.2017 for hearing.





Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



T.A. No. 16 of 2015

Kamal Singh Bhadoria Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.01.2017



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

and Shri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the respondents.

On call of the case, learned counsel for the applicant prays for

and is granted a week’s further time to file rejoinder affidavit.






Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



T.A. No. 47 of 2016

Surya Kant Tiwari Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.01.2017



Present: Shri Rohit Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and

Shri Virendra Singh, learned counsel for the respondents.

As prayed by learned counsel for the respondents list this case on

27.01.2017 for hearing to enable him to produce case law.





Form No. 4

[See rule 11(1)]

ORDER SHEET



T.A. No. 97 of 2016

Gyan Prakash Srivastava Applicant


Versus



Notes of the

Registry


16.01.2017



Present: Shri TB Shrivastava, learned counsel for the applicant,

and Shri Asheesh Agnihotri, learned counsel for the respondents.

On call of the case, learned counsel for the respondents submits

that this case has been received by way of transfer from AFT, Jabalpur

and no record is available with him. He prays for and is granted two

weeks’ time to prepare the case file.






form no. 4 [see rule 11(1)] order sheet armed forces ...aftlko.up.nic.in/c2 daily order/c2...

Documents