Back
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT BENCH AT JAIPUR
Dinesh Mehta, J.
Rambabu - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Writ Petition No. 114 of 2021
Decided On : 30-09-2021
WITHDRAWAL - WRIT PETITION - The court granted permission for the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition, allowing the option to file an appeal before the District Collector under the Rajasthan Food Grains and Other Essential Articles (Regulation of Distribution) Order, 1976. The court emphasized the importance of considering the delay in filing the appeal due to the petitioner's bona fide pursuit of remedy against a prior order.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking relief against an order dated 08.12.2020, which was filed on 19.12.2020.
Finding of the Court:
The court permitted the withdrawal of the writ petition, allowing the petitioner to file an appeal with the District Collector and instructed that any delay in filing should be considered in light of the petitioner's good faith efforts.
Issues: Whether the petitioner could withdraw the writ petition and file an appeal before the District Collector, and how the delay in filing should be treated.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner has the right to withdraw the writ petition and pursue an appeal, and that the District Collector should take into account the circumstances surrounding the delay in filing the appeal.
Result: The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn, with the liberty granted to file an appeal within 15 days.
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Mehta, J. - Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present writ petition with a liberty to file appeal before the District Collector under relevant provision of the Rajasthan Food Grains and Other Essential Articles (Regulation of Distribution) Order, 1976.
2. Permission granted.
3. The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty.
4. In case, petitioner prefers an appeal before the District Collector within 15 days from today along with an application under Section 5 of Limitation Act, the District Collector shall consider the delay having regard to the fact that the petitioner was bonafidely pursuing his remedy against the order dated 08.12.2020, by instant writ petition, which was filed on 19.12.2020.
5. Stay petition also stands dismissed accordingly.
A petitioner may withdraw a writ petition to pursue an alternative remedy, and delays in filing appeals can be considered based on the petitioner's bona fide actions.
The petitioner lacked locus standi to challenge the suspension of licenses of retail distributors, and the principles of natural justice were upheld in the proceedings.
The dismissal of a writ petition due to the petitioner's repeated non-appearance in hearings illustrates the necessity of adherence to principles of natural justice in administrative proceedings.
Availability of an efficacious remedy of appeal under Rule 30(i) of the Control Order, 2019 influenced the court's decision on the maintainability of the writ petition.
The Revisional Authority must record positive findings on legality and propriety; otherwise, quashing an order is jurisdictionally unsustainable.
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
