Tuesday, May 8, 2012

S-29 threatens to oppose BPS impleadment:They feel Court is under impression that CAT judgement of 01.11 2011is applicable only to S29

S-29 threatens to oppose  BPS impleadment:They feel Court is under impression that CAT judgement of 01.11 2011is applicable only to S29
From: Pratap Narayan



To: HARCHANDAN SINGH

Cc: SHYAM SUNDER Secretary General BPS ; S Maheshwari ; Netar P Mohan


Sent: Tuesday, 8 May 2012 9:59 PM


Subject: Re: Proposal to file Impleader in WP 1535 - 2012 in Delhi HC


Dear Shri Harchandan Singh


Thanks for your mail.


Normally, when a Writ petition is filed, the procedure is that first a


Notice is issued to the Respondent(s) and sufficient time is given,


generally a month or two, to appear for preliminary hearing whether or


not to admit the same. If it is admitted then further time of a few


months is given to the Respondents to file their reply with a copy to


the petitioners, who are also allowed time thereafter to file their


Rejoinder. This means at least 6 months time before hearing on merits


can start and during the period stay on the operation of the lower


Court order is stayed.


You will observe that in this case these preliminary procedures have


been dispensed with and the hearing on merits has started in less than


one and a half months. In fact, in order to expedite the process, on


the very first day, we gave up our right to file a written reply and


pleaded hearing on merits straight away by indicating the age profile


of our members, including 14 having died during CAT proceedings. As a


result, the case has been listed for ,final disposal' and it is our


understanding that it would conclude on the next date. Also please


note that no stay on CAT's judgment has been granted nor has the


Contempt proceedings initiated by us in CAT been stayed; we have only


voluntarily agreed not to press for it until HC decision on the Writ.


In view of the above, I am still not clear about the rationale for


your anxiety to intervene. It will only delay the matters and in no


way strengthen the merits of the case. On the other hand, intervention


by other parties will give an opportunity to the Government to plead


and frighten the Court that the issue involves serious financial


implications, which at present the Court thinks that it involves only


S 29 pensioners. This will only delay the outcome, which we old people


can not afford and, for that reason, even we may be compelled to


oppose your being made a party. I wish you had joined the battle when


we were struggling before CAT instead of becoming active now after we


have been successful.


You must appreciate that that with the quashing of the OMs dated


3-10-2008 and 14-10-2008, the benefit accrues to all the pensioners,


irrespective of the grade, and not only to us who were before CAT.


From this point of view also, your intervention at this stage is not


called for or be of any advantage except delaying the proceedings. You


should also appreciate that we have engaged the topmost Advocate who


has successfully piloted similar cases right upto Supreme Court and


your coming up with some other Advocate(s) is in no way going to


strengthen the case.


In view of the above, I would once again appeal to you to have


patience and not complicate matters. Hope you appreciate the position.


With regards,


Yours sincerely,


Pratap Narayan.


Post a Comment