Union of India and ors Vs. Ravindra Kumar Gupta

Union of India and ors vs Ravindra Kumar Gupta

Type Court Judgment Court Patna Decided May 25, 2012

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/975510

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/975510
Court: Patna High Court
Decided On: May 25, 2012
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Union of India and ors

Respondent

Ravindra Kumar Gupta

Excerpt

.....: mr. binay kumar pandey, c.g.c. ====================================================== coram: honourable the chief justice and honourable mr. justice birendra prasad verma oral order (per: honourable the chief justice) 2 patna high court lpa no.56 of 2012 (2) dt.25-01-2012 2/2 2. 25-01-2012 feeling aggrieved by the order dated 30th july 2010 made by the learned single judge in above c.w.j.c. no. 7709 of 2002, the respondent union of india has preferred this appeal under clause 10 of the letters patent. learned advocate mr. binay kumar pandey has appeared for the appellants. he has submitted that the appellants have complied with the direction issued on 30 th july 2010 in respect of continuation of the respondent-writ petitioner in army against a civil or non-combatant post in accordance with the order. he has, however, submitted that the relevant rule does not permit to accommodate an injured or incapacitated soldier to be posted on a civil or non-combatant post. be that as it may, the appellants have, in compliance of the direction issued by the learned single judge, made the order rejecting the request made by the writ petitioner. appellants having complied with the direction issued by the learned single judge, the present appeal against the aforesaid order dated 30th july 2007 is misconceived. appeal and the interlocutory applications are disposed of. (r.m. doshit, cj) (birendra prasad verma, j) pawan/-

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.56 of 2012 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 7709 of 2002 With Interlocutory Application No. 478 of 2012 With Interlocutory Application No. 479 of 2012 In Letters Patent Appeal No.56 of 2012 ====================================================== 1. Union of India through Secretary, Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi 2. The Secretary, Ministry of Defence, Government of India, New Delhi 3. The Commanding Officer, 890, Army Supply Core Battalion, C/O 5.A.P.O.

4. The Commanding Officer, 2 Trg Battalion, Army Supply Core Centre (North) Paharpur, Gaya .... .... Respondents-Appellants Versus Ravindra Kumar Gupta, Son of Sunder Sah, Resident of Village-Bansdiha, P.S. Kopa, District-Saran, Bihar. .... .... Petitioner-Respondent ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellants : Mr. Binay Kumar Pandey, C.G.C. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 2 Patna High Court LPA No.56 of 2012 (2) dt.25-01-2012 2/2 2. 25-01-2012 Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 30th July 2010 made by the learned single Judge in above C.W.J.C. No. 7709 of 2002, the respondent Union of India has preferred this Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent. Learned advocate Mr. Binay Kumar Pandey has appeared for the appellants. He has submitted that the appellants have complied with the direction issued on 30 th July 2010 in respect of continuation of the respondent-writ petitioner in Army against a civil or non-combatant post in accordance with the order. He has, however, submitted that the relevant rule does not permit to accommodate an injured or incapacitated soldier to be posted on a civil or non-combatant post. Be that as it may, the appellants have, in compliance of the direction issued by the learned single Judge, made the order rejecting the request made by the writ petitioner. Appellants having complied with the direction issued by the learned single Judge, the present Appeal against the aforesaid order dated 30th July 2007 is misconceived. Appeal and the Interlocutory Applications are disposed of. (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J) Pawan/-

Same Court & Year Patna · 2012 Same Parties Union of India and ors vs Ravindra Kumar Gupta Same Subject Land Acquisition