The Specific Prayers of the Staff artists in their I.A's 5 & 10 (interim applications) in Civil Appeal 4387/2007 (AUPO Case)which were collectively dismissed as devoid of merit by the Supreme Court on 18.4.2013 are reproduced below:-
PRAYER in first I.A. No.5 (dated 27th March 2012) filed by the Staff Artists
a) Pass an order/direction directing Respondent No.4 UPSC not to act or convene a DPC based on its affidavit dated 19.1.2012 filed before CAT , New Delhi in C.P.No.217 of 2005 in O.A.No. 399/2001 and on the basis of letter dated 06.03.2012 sent by DOP&T to UPSC in so far as it may involve reopening the regularization and relevant seniority of staff artists and such promotions which have been duly affected by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
b) Pass such order or further order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
PRAYER in second I.A. No.10 (dated 10th April 2013) filed by the Staff Artists
a) Pass an order/direction directing Respondent No.4 UPSC not to act or convene a DPC based on its letter dated 20.03.2013 sent to the Ministry of I&B in so far as it may involve reopening the date of regularisation and relevant seniority of staff artists and such promotions which are in tune and in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
b) Pass such order or further order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
SUPREME COURT ORDER DISMISSING BOTH APPEALS MADE BY STAFF ARTISTS IN I.A. No. 5 and I.A. No 10 IS REPRODUCED BELOW:-
ITEM NO.49 COURT
NO.8 SECTION XIV
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F
I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IAS 5 & 10/2013 in CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4387 OF 2007
ASSN.OF UPSC RECRUITED PROG. OFFICER ETC Appellant (s)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s)
(With appln(s) for directions and office report )
Date: 18/04/2013 This Appeal was
called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA
For Appellant(s) Mr. Colin Gonsalves, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Sevtlana C. Adv.
Mr. Juno Rahman, Adv.
Ms.Jyoti Mendiratta,Adv.
For Respondent(s)
Ms. Sunita Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Sunita Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Varuna Bhandari, Adv.
Mr. S. Wasim A. Qadri, Adv.
Mr. D.S. Mahra ,Adv
Mr. R. Venkataramani, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Charudatta Mahindrakar, Adv.
Mr. Shodhan Babu, Adv.
Ms. Neelam Singh, Adv.
Ms. Supriya Garg, Adv.
Mr. Aniruddha P. Mayee,Adv.
Mr. Bharat Sangal ,Adv
Mr. Ashwani Bhardwaj ,Adv
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Delay condoned.
Heard.
This application has no merit and
is dismissed with
the
observation that any order passed by the UPSC shall remain, subject
to the ultimate outcome of this appeal, pending in this Court.
| (GEETA AHUJA) |(VEENA KHERA) |
| Sr. P.A. | Court Master |
Explanatory Note:
1. Note that the Staff artists Prayer to
prevent UPSC from acting on
its letter of 20.3.2013 has been dismissed as without merit. (This
means that the UPSC can act on its letter of 20.3.2013) . Please see scanned copy of UPSC
letter on the blog.
2. The Supreme Court order dismissing the staff artists prayer also reaffirms that "any order passed by UPSC shall remain"....
Thus the Supreme Court has declared that not only the UPSC letter dated 20.3.2013 which the staff artists had prayed to quash (posted on the blog) is upheld , but any previous clarifications/order made by UPSC, such as UPSC Secretary's affidavit with DOPT advisory etc also remains (i.e is upheld/ to be followed ).
Thus the Supreme Court has declared that not only the UPSC letter dated 20.3.2013 which the staff artists had prayed to quash (posted on the blog) is upheld , but any previous clarifications/order made by UPSC, such as UPSC Secretary's affidavit with DOPT advisory etc also remains (i.e is upheld/ to be followed ).
3. subject to the ultimate outcome of this appeal ...
This means that the Supreme Court has directed that the UPSC may go along with the action proposed in
its letter dated 20.3.2013 regarding conduct of review DPC for the period
1990 onwards by
a) refusing contract
service
b) strictly going by date of screening into the
grade of PEX by UPSC
c) removing those not screened from eligibility
list etc ....
The above action would be ultimately subject to any
decisons/additional directions/observations
etc that the supreme court may make during the course of the Ashraf Lone
Review DPC for the previous period i.e 1982- 1989 (before IBPS) .
1 comment:
very useful information thanks a lot - Latest Jobs in India 2015
Post a Comment