Scribd
Upload
88 views3 pages

SC 1121912p

The document discusses a Supreme Court case between the Central Silk Board and Z.M.S. Khan regarding orders passed by a Tribunal and High Court. The Supreme Court dismisses the special leave petition filed against the High Court judgment, finding that the financial implication on the petitioner is too meagre. However, questions of law raised are left open to be argued in other cases, and the order is not to be treated as precedent.

Uploaded by

jimmylal
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as TXT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
88 views3 pages

SC 1121912p

The document discusses a Supreme Court case between the Central Silk Board and Z.M.S. Khan regarding orders passed by a Tribunal and High Court. The Supreme Court dismisses the special leave petition filed against the High Court judgment, finding that the financial implication on the petitioner is too meagre. However, questions of law raised are left open to be argued in other cases, and the order is not to be treated as precedent.

Uploaded by

jimmylal
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as TXT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

ITEM NO.

6 S U P R E M E

COURT NO.6

SECTION XVII

C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).11219/2012 (From the judgement and order dated 27/03/2012 in WP No.2503/2009 of The HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI) CENTRAL SILK BOARD VERSUS Z.M.S.KHAN & ORS. Respondent(s) Petitioner(s)

(With appln(s) for permission to file additional documents and prayer for interim relief and office report) (FOR FINAL DISPOSAL) Date: 10/04/2013 This Petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.L. DATTU HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR For Petitioner(s) Mr. Ms. Mr. Mr. Ms. P.P. Rao, Sr. Adv. Mahalakshmi Pavani,Adv. G. Balaji, Adv. Akshat Kulshreshta, Adv. Saumya Misra, Adv.

For Respondent(s)

Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv. Ms. M.M. Pal, Adv. Mr. Santosh Mishra, Adv. Mr. Sudeepto Pal, Adv. Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay,Adv. Mr. S.P. Singh, Sr, Adv. Mr. D.L.Chidanand, Adv. Mrs. Gargi Khanna, Adv. Ms. S.K. Bajwa, Adv. Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv

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

This special leave petition is directed against ..2/2 the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Jharkhand in WP(S) No. 2503 of 2009, dated 27.03.2012. By the impugned judgment and order, the High Court has affirmed the orders passed by the Tribunal in O.A. No. 75 of 2008, dated 13.01.2009. We have heard Shri P.P. Rao, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, Dr. Rajiv Dhawan, learned senior counsel for the respondents and Mr. S.P. Singh, learned senior counsel for the Union of India. In our opinion, taking into consideration the fact that the financial implication on the petitioner-organization is too meagre, we are not inclined to exercise our powers under Article 136 of the Constitution of India to annul the judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the Tribunal and affirmed by the High Court. Accordingly, we dismiss this special leave petition. However, it is clarified that the judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the Tribunal and affirmed by the High Court are only in respect of those Scientists who were before the Tribunal as applicants and are respondents in this special leave petition.

..3/-

3 The question of law raised and argued by Shri P.P. Rao, learned senior counsel is kept open, to be agitated in an appropriate case. All the contentions of both the parties are left open. We further clarify that this order shall not be treated as a precedent in any other case. Ordered accordingly.

| | |Court Master

[ Charanjeet Kaur ]

| | | |Asstt. Registrar

[ Vinod Kulvi ] |

You might also like