2015 (10) TMI 705

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....p; For the Respondent : Mr. Rajiv Kumar, ASGI, Mr. Deepak Roshan, Advocate Oral order: Per D.N. Patel, J.: 1. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is owned, managed and controlled by the Central Government. It is a Government Company and initially, in pursuance of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in ONGC case, the dispute between wholly Central Gov....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....shy;800/04 and along with the stay application No. SP­1043­44/04. 2. Counsel for the respondents submitted that the appeal preferred by the petitioner before CESTAT has already been disposed of much earlier in point of time i.e. on 11th November, 2005 and thereafter, there is no order in favour of this petitioner and if there is an application preferred by the petitioner before CESTAT, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the said High­Powered Committee is no more effective and hence, the petitioner is seeking restoration of its appeal as well as the stay application before the CESTAT as stated hereinabove. 4. We therefore, dispose of this writ petition with a direction to CESTAT, Kolkata that if any restoration application is preferred by the petitioner for Appeal No....