17 July 2017
Supreme Court
Download

RAJEEV KUMAR Vs LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH, HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI
Judgment by: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH
Case number: C.A. No.-009140-009140 / 2017
Diary number: 15212 / 2017
Advocates: P. D. SHARMA Vs


1

NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 9140 OF 2017 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 18174 OF 2017]

(@ DIARY NO(S). 15212/2017)

RAJEEV KUMAR                                  PETITIONER(S)                                 VERSUS

LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA & ORS.   RESPONDENT(S)

J U D G M E N T KURIAN, J.

Delay condoned. 2. Leave granted. 3. The  appellant  approached  the  High  Court, aggrieved  by  the  denial  of  work  by  Respondent No.1/Corporation. 4. In the nature of order we propose to pass, it is not necessary to issue notice, in our view. 5. It appears that the appellant has approached the High  Court  challenging  the  denial  of  work  and initially  the  appellant  was  granted  an  interim relief.   However, the writ petition was subsequently disposed of by holding that the remedy open to the appellant  is  to  take  recourse  to  the  alternative remedy as per Industrial Disputes Act.  According to the  appellant,  unfortunately  the  judgment  was  not communicated  to  him  and,  therefore,  there  was considerable delay in approaching the High Court, in appeal.   The  Division  Bench  dismissed  the  appeal holding  that  there  is  a  huge  delay  of  more  than eleven years in approaching the Division Bench.

1

2

6. Having regard to the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, we are of the view that the appellant, in the interest of justice, should be granted liberty to take recourse to the alternative remedy as pointed out by the learned Single Judge in the judgment in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.1072 of 2005, which reads as follows:-

“Heard  learned  counsel  for  the respondents.   Learned  counsel  for  the petitioner  is  not  present.   Perused  the record.

Learned counsel for the respondents has produced  the  judgment  dated  27.7.2004 rendered  in  Civil  Misc.  Writ  Petition NO.3281  of  2003  (Ved  Bhushan  v.  The Divisional  Manager/Senior  Manager,  L.I.C. Branch Office Muzaffarnagar).  He contends that the facts of the present writ petition are covered by the aforesaid judgment under which  the  petitioner  has  alternative remedy.

The  writ  petition  is  accordingly dismissed  on  the  ground  of  alternative remedy.  No order as to costs.”

7. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of making it clear that in case the appellant takes recourse to the  remedy,  as  pointed  out  by  the  learned  Single Judge in view of the decision in Ved Bhushan v. The Divisional  Manager/Senior  Manager,  L.I.C.  Branch Officer Muzaffarnagar, within a period of two months from  today,  the  same  may  not  be  dismissed  by  the Forum on the ground of delay. 8. The appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.

2

3

9. Pending  applications,  if  any,  shall  stand disposed of. 10. There shall be no orders as to costs.

.......................J.               [KURIAN JOSEPH]  

.......................J.               [R. BANUMATHI]  

NEW DELHI; JULY 17, 2017.

3

4

ITEM NO.34               COURT NO.6               SECTION                 S U P R E M E  C O U R T  O F  I N D I A                        RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Diary No(s). 15212/2017 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated  30-01-2017 in SAD No. 44/2017 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At  Allahabad) RAJEEV KUMAR                                       PETITIONER(S)                                 VERSUS LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA & ORS.         RESPONDENT(S) (WITH APPLN(S) FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING SLP AND EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)

Date : 17-07-2017 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM :           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH          HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI

For Petitioner(s) Mr. P.D. Sharma, AOR                     For Respondent(s)                               UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following                              O R D E R

Delay condoned. Leave granted. The appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed judgment.

(NARENDRA PRASAD)                               (RENU DIWAN) COURT MASTER (SH)                               ASST. REGISTRAR

(Signed “Non-Reportable” Judgment is placed on the file)

4