Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Sanjay Kumar Singh Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd Through Its Managing Director and ors

Sanjay Kumar Singh vs Steel Authority of India Ltd Through Its Managing Director and ors

Type Court Judgment Court Jharkhand Decided Aug 27, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1024763

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Jharkhand High Court
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sanjay Kumar Singh

Respondent

Steel Authority of India Ltd Through Its Managing Director and ors

Excerpt

in the high court of jharkhand at ranchi w.p.(s). no. 7057 of 2012 sanjay kumar singh .... petitioner versus steel authority of india ltd. & others ..... respondents ---------- coram: honble mr. justice aparesh kumar singh for the petitioner : mr. rajesh kumar for the respondents : mr. rajiv ranjan i.a. no. 4837 of 2013 & i.a. no. 4838 o”05. 27.08.2013 by way of i.a. no. 4837 of 2013 petitioner prays for impleading the c.e.o. & appellate authority, steel authority of india limited as party respondent in the instant writ application as according to the petitioner, during the pendency of the writ application the c.e.o & appellate authority has dismissed the petitioner's appeal preferred against the order of his dismissal dated 16.11.2012 which has been communicated vide letter no. 989 dated 11.6.2013, annexed as annexure-15 to i.a. no. 4838 of 2013. petitioner, by way of i.a. no. 4838 of 2013 also seeks to impugn the said appellate order communicated to the petitioner on 11.6.2013. learned counsel for the respondent does not dispute the fact that appellate order has been passed during the pendency of the writ application by the appellate authority and communicated to the petitioner vide annexure-15 dated 11.6.2013. in that view of the matter, since the proposed amendment are necessary and relates to the main cause of action, the instant interlocutory applications are allowed. w.p.(s). no. 7057 of 2012 let an amended writ petition be filed by the petitioner adding the c.e.o. & appellate authority, steel authority of india limited as party respondent in the writ application as also incorporating the amendments allowed today within a period of 2 weeks. respondents are allowed to file their response to the amended prayer within 4 weeks, thereafter. a. mohanty

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S). No. 7057 of 2012 Sanjay Kumar Singh .... Petitioner Versus Steel Authority of India Ltd. & others ..... Respondents ---------- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kumar For the Respondents : Mr. Rajiv Ranjan I.A. No. 4837 of 2013 & I.A. No. 4838 o”

05. 27.08.2013 By way of I.A. No. 4837 of 2013 petitioner prays for impleading the C.E.O. & Appellate Authority, Steel Authority of India Limited as party respondent in the instant writ application as according to the petitioner, during the pendency of the writ application the C.E.O & Appellate Authority has dismissed the petitioner's appeal preferred against the order of his dismissal dated 16.11.2012 which has been communicated vide letter no. 989 dated 11.6.2013, annexed as Annexure-15 to I.A. No. 4838 of 2013. Petitioner, by way of I.A. No. 4838 of 2013 also seeks to impugn the said Appellate order communicated to the petitioner on 11.6.2013. Learned counsel for the respondent does not dispute the fact that Appellate order has been passed during the pendency of the writ application by the appellate authority and communicated to the petitioner vide Annexure-15 dated 11.6.2013. In that view of the matter, since the proposed amendment are necessary and relates to the main cause of action, the instant interlocutory applications are allowed. W.P.(S). No. 7057 of 2012 Let an amended writ petition be filed by the petitioner adding the C.E.O. & Appellate Authority, Steel Authority of India Limited as party respondent in the writ application as also incorporating the amendments allowed today within a period of 2 weeks. Respondents are allowed to file their response to the amended prayer within 4 weeks, thereafter. A. Mohanty

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial