Union of India v. Amit Sharma

2. Learned counselfor thepetitioner submits that the order dated 30^^ June, 2014 was an interim order which was operative till 2&^ August, 2014. Thereafter subsequent orders have extended this interim order.

3. Be that as itmay, this writpetitionfiled on 15'^ May, 2015 was challenging an infructuous order dated 3(f^ June, 2014 which was effective only up to 26"^ August, 2014.

4. Learned counselfor the petitioner will obtain instructions. In case the interim stay order was extended on subsequent dates, the said orders have to be challenged. In case the Tribunal has not (Redded the application/ prayer for interim relief, then also the petitioner, if he has any grievance, has to make an appropriate prayer.

5. Relist on 12.05.2016. " Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he has not been able to obtain instructions, but as per information gathered from the website of the Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi, both the OA and the interim application are still pending. He submits that the interim orders, the subject-matter ofthe present petitions, have continued. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that suitable directions may be given to the Tribunal for early disposal of the OA, or at least the interim^ application. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents states that he has no objection and would join the petitioners in the prayer that the OA and the interim application should be decided at the earliest. He also submits that notwithstanding pendency of the contempt application, the OA and the interim application may be heard and decided. Recording the aforesaid statement of the learned counsel for the respondents and thepetitioner, we dispose of the present writ petitions, with a request to the Tribunal to take up the OA, and if it is not possible, the interim application, for disposal. CMNos.9169/2015 and 9171/2015 are also disposed of. -•// ^ SANJIVKHANNA,J Y NAJ]MIWAZIRI,J MAY 12, 2016 tp ^