Nabakishore Nayak v. National Aluminum Company Ltd., Bhubaneswar & Anr.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. With the aforesaid observation, the writ application stands disposed of. Jagabandhu ( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge // 2 //
Judgment
Mr. S. J. Mohanty, Advocate -versus- National Aluminum Company Ltd., Bhubaneswar and another CORAM: …. Opposite Parties Mr. T. Mishra, Advocate. JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA Order No. ORDER 12.04.2023
This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the NALCO-Opposite Parties.
It is submitted by Mr. T. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the NALCO-Opposite Parties that by virtue of notification of the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievance and Pensions dated 1st of December, 2008, which was issued in exercise of power conferred by Sub-section(2) of Section 14 of the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985, the Central Government has notified w.e.f. 15th of December, 2008 PSUs will come under the jurisdiction of Central Administrative Tribunal.
In such view of the matter, the present writ application is not maintainable before this Court. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack by filing an application.
With the aforesaid observation, the writ application stands disposed of. Jagabandhu ( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge // 2 //
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.