CONTEMPT PETITION FOR NON-IMPLEMENTATION OF N R PARMAR DECISION

On massive demand, CESA Mumbai reproduced the proceedings in Contempt Petition for non-implementation N R Parmar decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court Dated  09-05-2014.

-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.

                           S U P R E M E      C O U R T   O F    I N D IA

                             RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 526 OF 2013 IN Civil Appeal 7516/2005

VIRENDRA KUMAR & ORS                                    Petitioner(s)

            VERSUS

SUDHA SHARMA & ORS                                      Respondent(s)

Date: 09/05/2014     This Petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR

          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. AGRAWAL

             UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following.                                                                                                                        O R D E R

                  Learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2 has     invited this Court's attention to paragraph 2(xv) of the counter affidavit, which depicts that recommendations have been received from a Committee constituted for implementing the judgment rendered by this Court on 27.11.2012, and that  based on the   above   recommendations,   a   draft   tentative  seniority list has been prepared and circulated. It is further submitted that objections to the above tentative seniority list has since been received from the concerned employees, and that the same would  be  taken   into consideration  in preparing the    final    seniority list in consonance with the judgment dated 27.11.2012. To finalise the seniority list, learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2 seeks four weeks' time.
       In view of the explanation tendered by the learned counsel representing respondent nos. 1 and 2, four weeks further time is granted to the respondents to take into consideration the objections filed by the employees concerned, so as to implement the order passed by this Court on 27.11.2012. Needless to mention, that respondent nos. 1 and   2   shall be  personally responsible,for ensuring compliance of the undertaking given to this Court, within the time specified.

              Contempt petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

           Mr. P.S. Patwalia, learned senior counsel submits that the application for intervention filed by his clients may be dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the applicants to avail other remedies, in accordance with law. We order accordingly.