Filing reply to slp ..
Dr. Vinay Kumar
(Querist) 08 April 2016
This query is : Resolved
Dear Expert,
My case is related to ante dating of promotion of scientist post under FCS. I won the case in CAT and HC Delhi dismissed the WP(c) file by UOI. The Govt. after partial implementation of the CAT order and payment of partial amount, have filed SLP(Civil) CC in SC. A copy of the SLP is sent to me because I had filed a caveat. The SLP was file after elapse of 571 days since the order of HC Delhi. Should I file Reply to SLP before its first listing or simply I should appear on listing date with proper preparation. Kindly help with suitable and proper reply.
Regards
Dr. Vinay Kumar
Ex Scientist and Technical Director, GOI.
R.K Nanda
(Expert) 08 April 2016
if SLP is admitted by SC then next date must be mentioned on copy sent to you and in that case appear on next date and take time from SC to file ur reply.
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 08 April 2016
Since there is long delay the SLP is unlikely to be admitted on condoning delay of 571 days.
So appear and oppose the admission.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 08 April 2016
Appear and oppose the condoning of delay and hence admission of the SLP.
P. Venu
(Expert) 09 April 2016
Delay condonation is at the discretion of the Court. In service matters, the delay is likely to be condoned if the reasons for delay is explained and the petition raises a substantial question of law.
It is my personal opinion that the Caveat need not have been filed.
Dr. Vinay Kumar
(Querist) 09 April 2016
Thanx a lot sir for response.
It means I need not to file any reply right now. Simply I should appear on 9th May when it is likely to be listed.
Sir, what is chance (in %)that such SLP will be admitted by Supreme court, when I have won in CAT and Delhi HC dismissed the Writ petition (Civil) of GOI on the ground of being 'meritless'?
As a respondent, do I stand any chance to get the SLP dismissed on the very first day?
Regards
Vinay
--------------
R.K Nanda
(Expert) 10 April 2016
mostly SLPS are dismissed by SC.press SC to dismiss said SLP.
Dr. Vinay Kumar
(Querist) 11 May 2016
Dear Expert,
The said SLP(C) CC no. 4155/2016 was listed on 9/5/16. They advocate for petitioner asked for passover in the beginning and then when it was again called, the advocate did not appear. One assistant said Mr. Mahra is busy in other court so next date 10/5 was given.
Next day it was listed as last item no in court no. 5. Again the same story. The adovacte did not appear the presiding judge told me to come after vacation.
I am shocked to see in daily order that their presence in shown on the record in the daily order. In the order it was not mentioned that the advocate for petitoner did not turn up?
This shocking at SC level! How to deal with it? Is it not a corruption?
Pls guide me. I am appearing as caveator in person. I have been treated very badly there in court on these two days.
Dr. Vinay Kumar
(Querist) 11 May 2016
Dear Expert,
The said SLP(C) CC no. 4155/2016 was listed on 9/5/16. They advocate for petitioner asked for passover in the beginning and then when it was again called, the advocate did not appear. One assistant said Mr. Mahra is busy in other court so next date 10/5 was given.
Next day it was listed as last item no in court no. 5. Again the same story. The adovacte did not appear the presiding judge told me to come after vacation.
I am shocked to see in daily order that their presence in shown on the record in the daily order. In the order it was not mentioned that the advocate for petitoner did not turn up?
This shocking at SC level! How to deal with it? Is it not a corruption?
Pls guide me. I am appearing as caveator in person. I have been treated very badly there in court on these two days.
P. Venu
(Expert) 11 May 2016
This is a fact of life. The affairs in the Courts as clumsy as in any other field.
Any how, every crisis is an opportunity and take things in that spirit.
