RADHAKRISHNA MATHUR Vs. I. RAVI KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal, under clause 15 of the letters patent, is preferred against the order passed in C.C. No. 1899 of 2013 dated 05.11.2014 whereby the Learned Single Judge directed the appellant, if necessary, to review his earlier order.

(2.) THE respondent's services, as an ad hoc lecturer in the department of computer sciences in the National Defence Academy, Khadakwasla, Pune, were terminated by order dated 19.06.2000. Aggrieved thereby, the respondent herein filed O.A. No. 433 of 2000 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai (hereinafter called the "Tribunal"). The said O.A. was dismissed by the Tribunal by its order dated 30.01.2001. The respondent filed W.P. No. 1928 of 2012 before the Bombay High Court challenging the order of the Tribunal. By its order dated 03.06.2003, the Bombay High Court dismissed the said Writ Petition. S.L.P (Civil). No. 12941 of 2003 was filed thereagainst by the respondent, which was dismissed by the Supreme Court by its order dated 17.11.2003. The respondent sought review of the said order and the Supreme Court, by its order dated 10.02.2004, dismissed the review petition also.

(3.) IN his order in W.P. No. 20337 of 2004 dated 11.02.2005, a Learned Single Judge of this Court held that, against the order of dismissal dated 19.06.2000, the respondent had filed an appeal before the competent authority on 14.06.2004, which was rejected by order dated 17.07.2004; the reasons given in the appellate order were not correct; neither was the respondent heard nor was there any consideration of the matter on merits; the rejection of the appeal was not supported by any valid reasons; in view thereof, and especially with regards the pleas as raised in the appeal grounds, it was necessary for the appellate authority to go into the merits of the appeal and dispose it of on merits in accordance with law after giving notice and opportunity; and, in view of the same, the matter required to be considered afresh on merits. The writ petition was allowed setting aside the impugned orders, and the matter was remanded to the 2nd respondent for fresh disposal on merits and in accordance with law, after giving notice and opportunity to both the sides. The entire exercise was directed to be completed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.