IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
AJAY RASTOGI, DINESH CHANDRA SOMANI, JJ.
Ajay Kumar and anr. - Appellants
Versus
Fariduddin and Ors. - Respondents
D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1921 of 2017
Decided On : 19-02-2018
Service - Delay Condonation - Special Appeal against Single Judge's Order - Setting aside of Order - Restoration of Writ Petition
Fact of the Case:
The special appeal was filed against the order of the Single Judge, which had disposed of the writ petition based on the judgment of another Coordinate Single Bench.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the order of the Single Judge was not sustainable as it was decided based on the judgment of another Coordinate Single Bench, and therefore set aside the order and restored the writ petition.
Issues: Delay Condonation, Setting aside of Order, Restoration of Writ Petition
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the order of the Single Judge, which relied on the judgment of another Coordinate Single Bench, was not sustainable and deserved to be set aside.
Final Decision: The special appeal succeeded, and the order of the Single Judge was set aside, and the writ petition was restored.
1. The contesting respondent Nos.1-4 are being represented by Mr. Tanveer Ahamad, Adv. and as per office report the respondent Nos.5, 6, 7 & 9 have already been served and Mr. Rahul Kamwar, Adv. put appearance on behalf of respondent No.9. The respondent No.8 is one of the officer of the respondent No.1, therefore, service upon him is treated to be sufficient.
2. Mr. Vigyan Shah, Adv. made an oral request to dispense with service upon the respondent No.10 as no relief has been claimed against him.
3. Oral request is allowed & service upon respondent No.10 stands dispensed with.
4. However, office has pointed out delay in filing of the appeal & in support thereof a separate application u/Sec.5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay has been filed, which is satisfactorily explained & deserves to be condoned.
5. The application u/Sec.5 of the Limitation Act stands allowed. Delay is condoned.
6. The present special appeal is directed against the order of ld. Single Judge dt. 20.04.2017 in SBCWP No.5416/2016 which has been disposed of placing reliance on the Coordinate Single Bench of this Court in the case of Surendra Kumar Gurjar & Ors. versus State of Rajasthan & Ors., decided on 03.04.2017.
7. It is informed to this Court that against the order dt.03.04.2017 [Surendra Kumar Gurjar (supra)], the State of Rajasthan has preferred D.B.S.A.W. No.1017/2017 & after hearing the parties the Division Bench of this Court set-aside the said order dt.03.04.2017 & disposed of the appeal with the following directions:-
“5. The impugned order does not note the aforesaid facts. It was not a case where writ petition could have been allowed with the sweeping directions issued without granting appellant an opportunity to file a reply.
6. Disposing of the appeal we set aside the impugned order dated 03.04.2017 and restore Civil Writ Petition No.4582/2017 before the learned Single Judge. Appellants shall file a reply within six weeks. The writ petition would be listed before the learned Single Judge after six weeks.”
8. This Court has also decided certain special appeals in the light of the order passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in case of State of Rajasthan & Ors. Versus Surendra Kumar Gurjar & Ors.
9. In the instant case also, the ld. Single Judge has not examined the issue on merits and request made by the parties the writ petition was disposed of in light of the order passed in the case of Surendra Kumar Gurjar (supra) dt.03.04.2017.
10. After we have heard counsel for the parties & taking note of submissions made & also the fact that the ld. Single Judge decided the writ petition placing reliance on the judgment of another Coordinate Single Bench dt.03.04.2017, in our considered view the present order impugned is not sustainable & deserves to be set-aside.
11. Accordingly, the special appeal succeeds & allowed.
12. The order of the ld. Single Judge dt. 20.04.2017 is accordingly set-aside and the writ petition is restored and the State of Rajasthan & Ors./other respondents in the writ petition are at liberty to file reply.
Let the matter be listed before the ld. Single Judge.
AI
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.