Back
2022 Supreme(Raj) 1044
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, Sameer Jain, JJ.
Suo Motu – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6899 of 2019
Decided On : 25-05-2022
Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate, for the Appellant
Mr. S.S. Raghav, AAG, Mr. Siddharth Ranka, Advocate, Mr. Prateek Kasliwal, Advocate, with Ms. Gauri Jasana, Advocate, and, Mr. Tanmay, Mangal, Advocate, Mr. Angad Mirdha, Advocate, for the Respondent.
Appearance of counsel can be considered even if the respondent has not been formally served.
Headnote:
Service of Process - Appearance of Counsel - Summary
Fact of the Case:
The office report indicated that respondent No.4 had not been served, but counsel Mr. Siddharth Ranka appeared on behalf of respondent No.4.
Finding of the Court:
The court ordered the supply of the petition to counsel Mr. Siddharth Ranka within a week and directed the filing of a reply within four weeks, with the next listing scheduled after four weeks.
Issues:
Ratio Decidendi:
Final Decision: The court's decision was to ensure the supply of the petition to the appearing counsel and to set deadlines for the filing of a reply and the next listing.
ORDER
1. Though office report shows that respondent No.4 has not been served, learned counsel Mr. Siddharth Ranka entered appearance on behalf of respondent No.4.
Copy of petition be supplied to him within a week.
2. Reply be filed within four weeks.
3. List after four weeks.
