Header
| Sno | Hearing Date | Procceding |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 07-02-2022 |
Hearing held through video conferencing. Shri Pulkit Agarwal, Counsel for petitioner SECR.
Shri R.K. Mehta, Counsel for respondents CSPTCL and CSPDCL. Shri Saurabh Jain, counsel for respondent physically present. 2. The petitioner counsel submitted compilation of documents through email on 04.02.2022 and provides hard copy today. 3. Heard the parties. 4. The case is reserved for order. |
| 2 | 22-01-2022 |
Hearing held through video conferencing. The Member (Judicial) joined the hearing online.
Shri Pulkit Agarwal, Counsel for petitioner SECR. Shri R.K. Mehta, Counsel for respondents CSPTCL and CSPDCL. Shri Saurabh Jain, counsel for respondent SLDC. 3. The Chairman of the Commission is not available today, due to personal reasons. 4. In view of the above, the hearing is adjourned. 5. With consent of the parties, the case be listed for hearing on 07.02.2022 at 11:30 AM. |
| 3 | 22-01-2022 |
Hearing held through video conferencing. The Member (Judicial) joined the hearing online.
Shri Pulkit Agarwal, Counsel for petitioner SECR. Shri R.K. Mehta, Counsel for respondents CSPTCL and CSPDCL. Shri Saurabh Jain, counsel for respondent SLDC. 3. The Chairman of the Commission is not available today, due to personal reasons. 4. In view of the above, the hearing is adjourned. 5. With consent of the parties, the case be listed for hearing on 07.02.2022 at 11:30 AM. |
| 4 | 10-12-2021 |
Shri Pulkit Agarwal, Counsel along with Shri N.S. Bharel, CEE (EEM) for petitioner SECR.
Shri R.K. Mehta, Counsel for respondents CSPTCL and CSPDCL. Shri Saurabh Jain, counsel along with Shri G.K. Mandavi, SE for respondent SLDC. 2. In last hearing dated 29.10.2021 Member (Judicial) offered to refrain himself from hearing as his son had appeared earlier before the Commission in petition No. 59 of 2017, which has been referred in the present petition. Shri Mehta had expressed his faith on him immediately after his offer, but counsel of petitioner had sought time to discuss with the officers of the petitioner on this matter. He has sent a letter dated 07.12.2021 through email and expressed his complete faith in the Commission and expressed his no objection, if the Member (Judicial) attends the hearings. Further, he apologizes for delay in communicating his no objection. 3. Shri Mehta filed compilation of documents on behalf of the respondents CSPTCL and CSPDCL today. Copy given to the petitioner. 4. The petitioner counsel, in due course of hearing, filed a copy of document Annexure-J i.e. reply of CSPTCL filed in petition No. 59 of 2017(M), for reference. 5. Shri Mehta, though not objected such filing of document, seeks time to peruse the documents and file his counter submissions, if required. 6. Considered and allowed request of Shri Mehta. The respondents must file their replies by 22nd January 2022. |
| 5 | 29-10-2021 |
Hearing held through video conferencing.
Shri Pulkit Agarwal, Counsel along with Shri M.C. Meena, CEE (EEM) for petitioner SECR. Shri R.K. Mehta, Counsel for respondents CSPTCL and CSPDCL. Shri Saurabh Jain, counsel along with Shri G.K. Mandavi, SE (present in the Courtroom physically) for respondent SLDC. 2. In due course of hearing an earlier petition No. 59 of 2017 (OA) has been referred. After perusal of records, Member (Judicial) of the Commission pointed out that in petition No. 59 of 2017 his son Shri Abhishek Vinod Deshmukh has appeared before the Commission on behalf of the petitioner South East Central Railways (SECR), hence he would like to refrain himself from hearing of the petition. 3. Shri Mehta appreciated the spirit of Member (Judicial) and expressed faith on him. The petitioner counsel has also appreciated the Members spirit but want to discuss with the officers of the petitioner on this matter and thereafter, he will communicate his opinion. 4. In this situation, the hearing is adjourned. 5. With consent of the parties the case is fixed for final hearing on 10.12.2021 at 11:30 AM. |
| 6 | 24-09-2021 |
Hearing held through video conferencing.
Shri M.C.Meena, CEE (EEM) for petitioner SECR. Ms. Himanshi, Counsel for respondents CSPTCL and CSPDCL along with S. Manoj, SE and Shri S.K. Pandey, SE. Shri Saurabh Jain, Counsel for respondent SLDC. 2. It is informed through email dated 23.09.2021 on behalf of the counsel of Indian Railway that he is suffering from Dengue and would not be able to attend the hearing. Other parties have no objection on the request. 3. With consent of the parties, the case is fixed for final hearing on 29.10.2021 at 11:30 AM. |
| 7 | 08-07-2021 |
Hearing held through video conferencing.
Hearing held through video conferencing. Shri Pulkit Agarwal, Counsel along with Shri M.C.Meena, CEE (EEM), Shri Anurag Gaur, Engineer/REMCL for petitioner SECR. Shri R.K. Mehta, Counsel for respondents CSPTCL and CSPDCL along with S. Manoj, EE and Shri S.K. Pandey, EE. Shri Saurabh Jain, Counsel along with Shri G.K. Mandavi, SE for respondent SLDC. 2. With consent of the parties, the case is fixed for final hearing on 24.09.2021 at 11:30 AM. |
| 8 | 10-05-2021 |
The case was listed for hearing on 07.05.2021. Due to COVID -19 pandemic, complete lockdown was declared by the State Government in Raipur District w.e.f. 09.04.2021. Therefore, it was not possible to hear the case on scheduled date.
To be listed on 08.07.2021 at 11:30 AM for hearing. |
| 9 | 18-03-2021 |
Hearing held through video conferencing.
Shri Pulkit Agarwal, Counsel along with Shri M.C. Meena, CEE (EEM), for petitioner SECR. Ms. Himanshi, Counsel for respondents CSPTCL and CSPDCL along with Shri A.K. Sahu, EE and Shri S.K. Pandey, EE. Shri Saurabh Jain, Counsel along for respondent SLDC. 2. With consent of the parties, the case is fixed for hearing on 07.05.2021 at 11:30 AM. |
| 10 | 04-03-2021 |
The case is part heard and listed for hearing today. Shri Saurabh Jain, counsel for respondent, SLDC requested for adjournment on ground of personal difficulty.
2. Considering his request and reason shown in application, his request is allowed. 3. The case be listed for remaining arguments on 18.03.2021 at 3:30 PM. |
| 11 | 11-02-2021 |
Hearing held through video conferencing.
Shri Pulkit Agarwal, Counsel along with Shri M.C. Meena, CEE (EEM), Shri Sanjay Singh, Shri Anurag Gaur, EngineerREMCL and Ms. Swati Shrama for petitioner SECR. Shri A.K. Sahu, EE for respondent CSPTCL and Shri S.K. Pandey, EE for respondent CSPDCL. Shri Saurabh Jain, Counsel along with Shri G.K. Mandavi, SE for respondent SLDC. 2. The case was heard earlier by the bench consisting all three members. As the Chairman of the Commission is on leave today due to certain sudden developments, it would not be appropriate to hear the case in his absence. 3. With consent of the parties, the case is fixed for remaining arguments on 04.03.2021 at 12:00 Noon. |
| 12 | 04-02-2021 |
Hearing held through video conferencing.
Shri Pulkit Agarwal, Counsel along with Shri M.C. Meena, CEE (EEM), Shri Sanjay Singh, Shri Anurag Gaur, EngineerREMCL for petitioner SECR. Shri R.K. Mehta, Counsel for respondents CSPTCL and CSPDCL along with Shri A.K. Sahu, EE and Shri S.K. Pandey, EE. Shri Saurabh Jain, Counsel along with Shri G.K. Mandavi, SE for respondent SLDC. 2. Shri Agrawal completes his reply of respondent’s arguments. 3. Shri R.K. Mehta seeks time for arguments. Prayer allowed. 4. With consent of the parties, the case is fixed for hearing on 11.02.2021 at 11:30 AM. |
| 13 | 02-02-2021 |
Hearing held through video conferencing.
Shri Pulkit Agarwal, Counsel along with Shri M.C. Meena, CEE (EEM), Shri Sanjay Singh, Shri Anurag Gaur, EngineerREMCL and Ms. Swati Shrama for petitioner SECR. Shri R.K. Mehta, Counsel for respondents CSPTCL and CSPDCL along with Shri A.K. Sahu, EE and Shri S.K. Pandey, EE. Shri Saurabh Jain, Counsel along with Shri G.K. Mandavi, SE for respondent SLDC. 2. Shri R.K. Mehta completes his arguments on behalf of respondent CSPDCL and CSPTrCL. Shri Saurabh Jain do not want to argue as the points raised by SLDC has been covered by the Shri R.K. Mehta in his arguments. 3. Shri Agrawal started counter arguments but could not be competed. 4. With consent of the parties the case is fixed for remaining arguments on 04.02.2021 at 4:00 PM. |
| 14 | 28-01-2021 |
Hearing held through video conferencing. The Chairman of the Commission has also joined the hearing through video conferencing.
Shri Pulkit Agarwal, Counsel along with Shri M.C. Meena, CEE (EEM), Shri R.K. Sahu, CEDE, Shri Anurag Gaur, EngineerREMCL for petitioner SECR. Shri R.K. Mehta, Counsel for respondents CSPTCL and CSPDCL along with Shri A.K. Sahu, EE and Shri S.K. Pandey, EE. Shri Saurabh Jain, Counsel along with Shri G.K. Mandavi, SE for respondent SLDC. 2. The petitioner had completed arguments earlier. Today, Shri R.K. Mehta started arguments on behalf of respondent CSPDCL and CSPTrCL, but could not be competed. 3. With consent of the parties the case is fixed for remaining arguments on 02.02.2021 at 3:30 PM. |
| 15 | 21-01-2021 |
Hearing held through video conferencing.
Shri Pulkit Agarwal, Counsel along with Shri M.C.Meena, CEE (EEM), Shri R.K. Sahu, CEDE, Shri Anurag Gaur, EngineerREMCL for petitioner SECR. Shri R.K. Mehta, Counsel for respondents CSPTCL and CSPDCL along with Shri A.K. Sahu, EE and Shri S.K. Pandey, EE. Shri Saurabh Jain, Counsel along with Shri G.K. Mandavi, SE for respondent SLDC. 2. The case is fixed for final hearing today. Counsel of petitioner SECR argued today. During argument, the counsel cited some judgments, which was not filed earlier. He is directed to produce copies of the judgments to the Commission and also give to the respondents. 3. In our view, it would be appropriate that the respondents arguments be heard after the filing of the judgment. Therefore, with consent of the parties, further arguments in this case will be heard on 28.01.2021 at 3.00 pm. |
| 16 | 11-12-2020 |
Hearing held through video conferencing.
Shri Pulkit Agarwal, Counsel along with Shri M.C.Meena, CEE (EEM), Shri R.K. Sahu, CEDE, Shri Anurag Gaur, EngineerREMCL for petitioner SECR. Shri R.K. Mehta, Counsel for respondents CSPTCL and CSPDCL along with Shri A.K. Sahu, EE and Shri S.K. Pandey, EE. Shri Saurabh Jain, Counsel along with Shri G.K. Mandavi, SE for respondent SLDC. 2. Pleadings of the case are completed. However, it is observed that original copy of sur-rejoinder is not filed by CSPDCL. They are directed to file the original copy of sur-rejoinder within a week. 3. The case be listed for final hearing on 21.01.2021 at 3:30 pm. |
| 17 | 07-10-2020 |
The case was listed for hearing on 11.09.2020. Due to detection of Covid-19 cases in the office of the Commission, office was closed and, therefore, the case was adjourned.
3. The case be listed for hearing on 11.12.2020 at 03:30 PM. |
| 18 | 07-08-2020 |
Hearing held today. Counsels and representatives of the parties joined through video conferencing.
Shri Pulkit Agarwal, Counsel along with Shri M.C.Meena, CEE (EEM), Shri R.K. Sahu, CEDE, Shri Anurag Gaur, EngineerREMCL for petitioner SECR. Shri R.K. Mehta, Counsel for respondents CSPTCL and CSPDCL along with Shri A.K. Sahu, EE and Shri S.K. Pandey, EE. Shri Saurabh Jain, Counsel along with Shri G.K. Mandavi, SE for respondent SLDC. 2. Shri Mehta stated that the rejoinder filed by the petitioner, though within the time limit given by the Commission, was received by them just two days ago. In the rejoinder, certain allegations have been made for which the respondent needs to file sur-rejoinder. He seeks two weeks time for filing sur-rejoinder. We accept his request. 3. Shri Pulkit Agarwal requests to fix the case for hearing a week after filing of sur-rejoinder. 4. Considering submissions of the parties, we direct to list the case for final hearing on 11.09.2020 at 3:30 pm. |
| 19 | 26-06-2020 |
Hearing held today. Counsels and representatives of the parties joined through video conferencing.
Shri Pulkit Agarwal, Counsel along with Shri M.C.Meena, CEE (EEM), Shri R.K. Sahu, CEDE, Shri Anurag Gaur, EngineerREMCL for petitioner SECR. Shri R.K. Mehta, Counsel for respondents CSPTCL and CSPDCL along with Shri A.K. Sahu, EE and Shri S.K. Pandey, EE. Shri Saurabh Jain, Counsel along with Shri G.K. Mandavi, SE for respondent SLDC. 2. Shri Mehta seeks four weeks time and Shri Jain seeks two weeks time for filing replies. 3. Shri Puklit Agarwal wants to file rejoinder, if required, after filing of reply and prayed for two weeks time for the same. 4. Considering requests of the parties, we direct the respondents to file their replies within the time limit prayed by them with copies to the petitioner. 5. The petitioner may file rejoinder within two weeks time from the date of receipt of replies with copy to the concerned respondents. 6. The parties are directed to ensure that all pleadings must be completed before the date of hearing. 7. The case be listed for hearing on 07.08.2020 at 3:30 pm. |
| 20 | 24-04-2020 | Commissions Order for hearing on 26.06.2020 at 03:30 noon. |