Meta Pixel
CNR: T.A./6396/2021
DISPOSED

Akhil Mahajan (M) , vs D/O POWER DEVELOPMENT UT OF J&K (M) ,

Case NumberT.A./6396/2021
Date of Filing13 Aug 2021
Case TypeT.A.
Last Hearing20 Oct 2022
State--
City--
Year of Filing2021

Party Details

Petitioner
  • Akhil Mahajan (M)
Respondent
  • D/O POWER DEVELOPMENT UT OF J&K (M)

Case Summary

Akhil Mahajan (M) filed Case No. T.A./6396/2021 in the CAT on 13 Aug 2021 against D/O POWER DEVELOPMENT UT OF J&K (M). The case has undergone 6 hearings over 1 year and 1 month. The case was disposed of on 20 Oct 2022. 2 orders have been issued in this matter.

Hearing History (6)

  • 20OCT 2022
    FOR DIRECTION (APPEARANCE)

    Judge: N/A

    Stage: DISMISSED IN DEFAULT

  • 18APR 2022
    FOR DIRECTION (APPEARANCE)

    Judge: N/A

    Stage: ADJOURNED WITH DIRECTIONS

  • 21FEB 2022
    FOR DIRECTION (APPEARANCE)

    Judge: N/A

    Stage: ADJOURNED WITH DIRECTIONS

  • 31DEC 2021
    FOR DIRECTION (APPEARANCE)

    Judge: N/A

    Stage: ADJOURNED WITH DIRECTIONS

  • 29DEC 2021
    FOR DIRECTION (APPEARANCE)

    Judge: N/A

    Stage: ADJOURNED WITH DIRECTIONS

  • 25AUG 2021
    FRESH T.A.

    Judge: N/A

    Stage: ADJOURNED WITH DIRECTIONS

Orders (2)

Judgement DetailsView full order PDF ↗

1 T.A No.

6396/2021 CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL Jammu Bench, Jammu T.A.

No.

6396/2021 This the 20th Day of October, 2022 (Through Video Conferencing) Hon’ble Mr.

Suresh Kumar Batra, Member (J) Akhil Mahajan …Applicant (By Advocate: Ms.

Neena Mishra-Not Present) Versus UT of J&K and Ors …Respondent (By Advocate: Mr.

Hunar Gupta, Ld.

D.A.G) ORDER (ORAL) The Case was called out twice.

None present for the applicant.

Mr.

D.A.G appeared for the respondents.

2.

This SWP No.

1654/2011 has been transferred by the Hon’ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir to this Tribunal vide order dated 08.07.2021 3.

Despite sending the link for joining through video conference to Ld.

Counsel for applicant, no one has appeared on behalf of applicant today.

On the last date also, no one was appeared on behalf of applicant.

It seems that the applicant has lost interest in pursuing the matter.

Accordingly, the matter is dismissed for non prosecution. (Suresh Kumar Batra) Member (J) Arun…