AMITAVA LALA
BINAPANI DAS – Appellant
Versus
C. M. C. – Respondent
( 1 ) THIS review application is arising out of an order which was passed by this Court on 18th September, 2003. Such order was passed in presence of both the parties. In disposing of the writ I directed the matter to be heard by appellate authority on the basis of the submission of the Learned counsel appearing for the respondents. This review application arises on that score.
( 2 ) MR. Jayanta Kumar Mitra, Learned Counsel, appearing for the petitioner contended that the cause of action for filing of the writ petition before this court was for not giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner by the hearing Officer. Therefore, the matter is to be heard by the Hearing Officer first. If the appellate authority is directed to hear out on the basis of the submission of the respondents, in that case, they will lose one of the valuable opportunities of hearing before the Hearing Officer. No notice was served upon the appropriate address of the petitioner so that she could not be present before the appropriate authority. Therefore, in absence of the petitioner an ex parte order was passed by the Hearing Officer.
( 3 ) MR. Barin Banerjee, Learned Counsel, appearin
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.