Central Administrative Tribunal
Upendra Vilas Dhonde vs M/o Water Resources on 30 December 2019
1OANo.410/2018
ub
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI BENCH, MUMBAI
ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.410/2018
Date of decision: 30.12.2019
CORAM:- R. VIJAYKUMAR, MEMBER (A).
R.N. SINGH, MEMBER (J).
Shri Upendra Vilasrao Dhonde
S/o. Vilasrao Dhonde,
Aged 43 years,
Occ. Assistant Hydrogeologist
R/o. Flat No.102,
Nisarg Residency,
Sector-29,
Ravet Pradhikaran, Pune.
... Applicant.
(By Advocate Shri S. S. Gadre)
VERSUS.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. 1. Union of India, Through the Secretary Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti Bhawan, New Delhi-110001.
2. 2. The Chairman Central Ground Water and Ministry of Water Resources Government of India, Bhujal Bhawan, N. H. 4, Faridabad-121 001, (Haryana) State.
3. 3. The Regional Director Central Ground Water Board
2OANo.410/2018
Central Region, N. S. Building, Civil Lines, Nagpur-440001.
1. 4. The Officer-In-Charge Central Ground Water Board Maharashtra State Unit, Kendriya Sadan Akurdi, Pune-411 044.
... Respondents.
(By Advocate Shri B. K. Ashok Kumar)
O R D E R (O R A L)
Per: R. VIJAYKUMAR, MEMBER (A)
1. 1. When the case is called out, none appeared for the applicant.
2. 2. Shri Rishi Ashok, proxy counsel for Shri B. K. Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents.
3. 3. Neither the applicant nor his learned counsel appeared when the case was called out. It was noted during the hearing on 06.03.2019, that the applicant had claimed multiple reliefs in the OA and his counsel represented stating that he would file an amended OA and this was permitted in the circumstances to which reply was filed by the respondents on 23.08.2018 and four weeks time was granted to the applicant who now requested time to file rejoinder.
4. 4. Thereafter, during the hearing on 28.11.2019, nobody appeared for the applicant not was any rejoinder filed. Even today, when the case was called 3OANo.410/2018
out, neither the applicant nor his learned counsel are present.
5. It appears that the applicant has lost interest in pursuing the matter.
6. In view of the above, the OA is dismissed in default for non-prosecution.
7. No order as to costs.
(R. N. Singh) Member (J)
(R. Vijaykumar) Member (A)
V.
JD 3/1/12/18