Union of India & Ors. Vs. N.S. Tiwana
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal No. 8949 of 1994
Petitioner: Union of India & Ors.
Respondent: N.S. Tiwana
Apeal: Civil Appeal No. 8949 of 1994
Judges: Dr. A.S. ANAND, CJI., R.C. LAHOTI & K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Oct 08, 2000
Head Note:
SERVICE AND LABOUR LAW
Constitution
Article 136 – Relief – Chairman, Central Water Pollution Control Board – All benefits including emoluments for complete tenure received – After retirement, again employed on contract basis. Held that under facts, no pronouncement on the question of law is needed. Costs reduced to Rs. 10,000.
(Paras 2, 3)
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. Upon this appeal coming up for hearing, it is pointed out by learned Counsel for the respondent that the respondent had received all benefits including emoluments which would have accrued to him, in case he had completed his tenure of three years as Chairman of Central Water Pollution Control Board, as per letter of appointment under orders of the High Court. It is also stated that after repatriation of the respondent he has retired and has again been employed on contract basis by the Government of Punjab. Learned Counsel for appellants submits that in view of this development, we may not pronounce upon the question of law involved and dispose of this appeal. It is submitted that costs imposed by the Bench are in the nature of ‘punitive costs’ and in the established facts ‘exemplary costs’ were not called for.
2. In view of efflux of time and developments which have taken place, as pointed out by learned Counsel for respondent, we dismiss this appeal without expressing any opinion on the question of law.
3. However, insofar as the exemplary costs are concerned, we set aside the impugned order and instead direct costs of Rs. 10,000/-, to be paid to respondent-Shri N.S. Tiwana.
1. Upon this appeal coming up for hearing, it is pointed out by learned Counsel for the respondent that the respondent had received all benefits including emoluments which would have accrued to him, in case he had completed his tenure of three years as Chairman of Central Water Pollution Control Board, as per letter of appointment under orders of the High Court. It is also stated that after repatriation of the respondent he has retired and has again been employed on contract basis by the Government of Punjab. Learned Counsel for appellants submits that in view of this development, we may not pronounce upon the question of law involved and dispose of this appeal. It is submitted that costs imposed by the Bench are in the nature of ‘punitive costs’ and in the established facts ‘exemplary costs’ were not called for.
2. In view of efflux of time and developments which have taken place, as pointed out by learned Counsel for respondent, we dismiss this appeal without expressing any opinion on the question of law.
3. However, insofar as the exemplary costs are concerned, we set aside the impugned order and instead direct costs of Rs. 10,000/-, to be paid to respondent-Shri N.S. Tiwana.
