Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
AJAY RASTOGI, J.
Ms. Shakuntala wife of Shri Naresh Kumar - Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors. - Respondents
S.B. Writ Miscellaneous Application No. 391 of 2013
Decided On : 02-02-2018
Penalty - Departmental Enquiry - Order recalling and restoration of writ petition
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a miscellaneous application for recalling the order and restoration of the writ petition, challenging the penalty inflicted upon the delinquent after a departmental enquiry. The counsel mistakenly stated that the petition had become infructuous, but it was argued that the penalty issue needed to be examined on merits.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the order challenged in the writ petition needed to be examined on merits and could not be considered as having become infructuous in any changed circumstances. The miscellaneous application was allowed, and the order was recalled, restoring the writ petition to its original number for further consideration.
Issues: The issues involved the challenge of the penalty inflicted after a departmental enquiry and the mistaken belief that the petition had become infructuous.
Ratio Decidendi: The key legal provision discussed by the court was the need to examine the challenged order on its merits, as it could not be considered as having become infructuous in any changed circumstances.
Final Decision: The court allowed the miscellaneous application, recalling the order and restoring the writ petition for further consideration.
1. Matter has come up on the misc. application filed by the petitioner for recalling of the order dt.23.04.2011 & for restoration of the writ petition.
2. Counsel submits that in the writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order of penalty inflicted upon the delinquent after holding departmental enquiry dt.31.12.1997 and reply was filed by the respondents and at least the matter of penalty in no manner could be considered as infructuous and has to be examined on merits and it appears that under some misconception, the counsel made a request that the petition has become infructuous and the in the interest of justice, the order deserves to be recalled.
3. Having heard counsel for the parties, this court is also of the view that order which has been challenged in the writ petition has to be examined on merits and could not be construed as having become infructuous in any changed circumstances.
4. Accordingly, the instant misc. application is allowed. The order dt.23.04.2011 is recalled and S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8865/2007 is restored to its original number and may be listed before the regular Bench holding the subject roster.
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
