9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 2006X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R, Mr.B.V.Balaram Das, AOR, Mr. Arvind Kumar ,Sharma, AOR, Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, AOR. JUDGMENT ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, J. 1. This writ petition is filed by one Mr. Ramesh Sanka under Article 32 of the Constitution of India seeking for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ or directions directing Respondent No.23 (CBI) to investigate the entire matter and examine all the allegations made by the writ petitioner against Respondent Nos.12 to 22 in accordance with law. The other reliefs claimed in clause (b) to (d) of the writ petition are consequential to the main relief. 2. Stated concisely, the petitioner seeks the aforementioned reliefs on following facts. 3. The petitioner is a former employee of Respondent No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fences punishable under the Acts. 8. It is essentially with these background facts; the writ petitioner has made allegations in the writ petition. He has also filed some documents to show prima facie that the prayer made by him in his writ petition deserves consideration. 9. On 11.07.2018, this Court issued notice of this writ petition confining it to the official respondents namely, respondent Nos.7 to 11. These respondents have filed the status report in a sealed cover. One officialrespondent has filed the affidavit. 10. Respondent No.12 - Company, however, in the meantime entered suo motu appearance and has filed IA No.104447 of 2018 praying therein for dismissal of the writ petition on legal as well as on factual grounds. 11. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 171501/2018, 160094/2018, 163098/2018, D. No.17594347/2018, 144019/2018, 81895/2018, 165472/2018, 163874/2018, 157884/2018, 115735/2018 and 2974/2019, seeking therein various kinds of reliefs for them individually and collectively against respondent No.12 - Company, in relation to their independent dealings which they claimed to have had with respondent No.12 - Company and which according to them are not till date fructified and given to them by respondent No.12 - Company, as agreed. 14. We have heard all the learned counsel for the parties in support of their case. 15. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the law laid down by this Court in the cases reported in State of Uttaranchal vs. Balwant Singh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it petitioner against the other respondents are concerned, suffice it to say, this court by order dated 11.07.2018 had issued notice to the official respondents Nos.7 to 11. These respondents pursuant to the notice issued have filed their respective status report in relation to the inquiries, which is being undertaken by them in their respective jurisdiction. We have perused the same. 20. Needless to say depending upon the outcome of the inquiry once it is completed by the respective official respondents in their exclusive jurisdiction under various Acts, the appropriate action as provided in law will follow against all those who are found guilty. 21. Before parting, we make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on several factu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
