Raj Kumar Gupta v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr

1. The appellant is aggrieved by the common order passed in these appeals by a learned Single Judge of this Court on 18.12.2012 in W.P.(C) No. 3750/2004 and W.P.(C) No.16896/2006. By virtue of the impugned order, the matter has been remanded to the Tribunal to decide O.P.No.501/1992 and I.D.No.400/1993 afresh in view ofthe law laid down by the Supreme CourtinDTC Vs.SardarSinsh AIR 2004 SC 4161.

2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. We are not 2013:DHC:8515-DB A I y b interfering with the remand order made by the learned Single Judge. However,we are modifying the directions given by the learned Single Judge to the extent that none ofthe observations made by the learned Single Judge on the merits ofthe matter shall be binding on the Tribunal and the Tribunal shall go into all issues including preliminary issues afresh without being influenced by any observations made by the learned Single Judge in the impugned order. The parties are also granted liberty to adduce additional evidence,ifany,on merits.

3. We hope that the Tribunal shall conclude and decide O.P.No.501/1992 and I.D.No.400/1993 within a period of six months from today. For the sake ofconvenience and to avoid any conflicting order, both the matters be clubbed together and be heard by the same Tribunal. The District and Sessions Judge, Karkardooma is directed to place both the matters before one Judge.

4. With these obseiwations and directions, the appeals are disposed of.

BADAR DURREZ AHMED,ACJ VIBHU BAKHRU,J JULY 30,2013 'anb'