
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH
Order Sheet
Item No: 20 O.A./1556/2017 [ ADJUST IN SAME POST ] Court No.: 1						No of Adjournment: 3 Dated: 16/03/2018
DR MAYANK JAYANT Vs GOVT. MEDICAL COLLEGE, CHANDIGARH

FOR APPLICANTS(S) Advocate :				Mr. K.B. Sharma, proxy for Mr. D.R. Sharma, Advocate

FOR RESPONDENT(S) Advocate :				Mr. Aseem Rai, Advocate for Respondents No. 1 to 3 & 5,Mr. B.B. Sharma, Advocate for Resp. NO. 4,Mr. Rohit Seth, applicant in MA 332/2018

DAILY ORDER

MA NO. 060/00332/2018 Reply to the application neither filed nor sought to be filed, on behalf of the applicant (in Original O.A.) Having heard learned counsel for the parties, having gone through the record, with their valuable help, and for the reasons mentioned therein, I am of the firm view that the presence of applicant (in MA) Dr. Ashwani K Dalal, is very essential, to decide the real controversy, between the parties, and in order to avoid the possibility of multiplicity of litigation. Therefore, the M.A. is allowed, and Dr. Ashwani K Dalal is ordered to be impleaded as Respondent No. 6, in the array of respondents. Amended Memo of Parties is taken on record. Main O.A. Adjourned to 11.04.2018, to enable the newly added Respondent No. 6 to file reply to the main O.A.. Meanwhile, the applicant may file reply to the application for vacation of stay, with an advance copy to the learned counsels for the respondents.

Justice M. S. Sullar Member (J)