TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (5) TMI 879
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bitrary and in violation of principles of natural justice as before passing the order no show cause notice was given to the respondent no. 1. On 30^th April, 2012 the matter came up before the learned Single Judge for the first time when the counsel for the appellant also appeared on advance notice. The matter was argued at some length and whereafter notice of the writ petition was issued by the learned Single Judge and on the stay application filed by the respondent no. 1 herein, following order has been passed:- "Operation of the order dated 23.04. 2012 passed by the respondent no. 1 (appellant in this appeal) shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing." 2. It is stated that Capt. N.K. Beri is the father of the respondent no. 1 who misused his position to get the respondent no. 1 absorbed in the appellant. It is further stated that in the vigilance investigation conducted by the appellant it was found that induction of the respondent no. 1 was not in accordance with the laid down procedures of the appellant and because of that reason the respondent no. 1 who was still on probation, his services were terminated by an innocuous order. The order dated 23^rd April,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f final hearing of the writ petition. In this case also, the appellants have not yet filed counter affidavit to the writ petition of the respondents." 4. Another judgment to which reference is made is State of U.P. v. Ram Sukhi Devi (2005) 9 SCC 733 where the court denounced the practice of granting such interim orders in the following manner:- "8. To say the least, approach of the learned Single Judge and the Division Bench is judicially unsustainable and indefensible. The final relief sought for in the writ petition has been granted as an interim measure. There was no reason indicated by learned Single Judge as to why the government order dated 26-10-1998 was to be ignored. Whether the writ petitioner was entitled to any relief in the writ petition has to be adjudicated at the time of final disposal of the writ petition. This Court has on numerous occasions observed that the final relief sought for should not be granted at an interim stage. The position is worsened if the interim direction has been passed with stipulation that the applicable government order has to be ignored. Time and again this Court has deprecated the practice of granting interim orders which pract....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntain status quo as obtaining on the date of the commencement of the proceedings. However, there are a few cases which call for the Court's leaning not in favour of maintaining the status quo and still lesser in percentage are the cases when an order tantamounting to a mandamus is required to be issued even at an interim stage. There are matters of significance and of moment posing themselves as moment of truth. Such cases do cause dilemma and put the wits of any Judge to test. 12. Situations emerge where the granting of an interim relief would tantamount to granting the final relief itself. And then there may be converse cases where withholding of an interim relief would tantamount to dismissal of main petition itself; for, by the time the main matter comes up for hearing there would be nothing left to be allowed as relief to the petitioner though all the findings may be in his favour. In such cases the availability of a very strong prima facie case -- of a standard much higher than just prima facie case, the considerations of balance of convenience and irreparable injury forcefully tilting the balance of case totally in favour of the applicant may persuade the Court ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dbury (India) Ltd. (2000) 5 SCC 573 and Anand Prasad Agarwalla, (2001) 5 SCC p. 570, para6]; (iii) Harbanslal Sahnia v. Indian Corpn. Ltd. (2003) 2 SCC 107 - "7. So far as the view taken by the High Court that the remedy by way of recourse to arbitration clause was available to the appellants and therefore the writ petition filed by the appellants was liable to be dismissed is concerned, suffice it to observe that the rule of exclusion of writ jurisdiction by availability of an alternative remedy is a rule of discretion and not one of compulsion. In an appropriate case, in spite of availability of the alternative remedy, the High Court may still exercise its writ jurisdiction in at least three contingencies: (i) where the writ petition seeks enforcement of any of the fundamental rights; (ii) where there is failure of principles of natural justice; or (iii)where the orders or proceedings are wholly without jurisdiction or the vires of an Act is challenged. (See Whirlpool Corpn. V. Registrar of Trade Marks (1998) 8 SCC 1). The present case attracts applicability of the first two contingencies. Moreover, as noted, the petitioners‟ dealership, which is their bread and bu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e aforesaid cases cited by the respondent no. 1 pertains to service matter. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the appellant has referred to those judgments which are directly related to the case at hand where the services of a person are terminated and the question arises as to whether such termination should be stayed as an interim measure. In all these cases the consistent approach of the Supreme Court is that normally there should not be any stay of termination. As recorded above, the Supreme Court laid down that such a relief which tantamounts to final relief has to be granted in exceptional cases and where the situation becomes irretrievable and the subject matter of the petition would become infructuous or fait accompli before the final hearing that would depend on the position in the instant case. Even if the termination is held to be illegal and unjustified at the time of passing the final order the respondent no. 1 can always be compensated by directing payment of full salary during the period he remained out of employment. Therefore, it would not be a case where the situation would be irretrievable. 9. We may, in all fairness to counsel for the respondent no. ....