APARESH KUMAR SINGH, PRAKASH TATIA
National Printers – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant in I.A. No. 1446 of 2012.
2. First of all, it appears that the office has wrongly listed decided writ petition; W.P. (C) No. 961 of 2012, for orders as the said writ petition was already decided along with L.P.A. No. 180 of 2012 vide judgment dated 19th April, 2012.
3. Whenever any application is submitted in decided cases then on that count decided cases can not be listed in Court even for “For Orders” unless any specific order is passed by the Court on the application submitted in the decided case. The Court also can order to list the decided matter suo moto.
4. It was practice in the Court to move Interlocutory Application even in decided cases whereas such applications can be filed only as Civil Miscellaneous Petitions, which is required to be separately registered and may be placed before the Court for orders on such application so that proper order can be passed by the Court on such application so as to call for the record of the decided matter, if needed.
5. To avoid delay, it may be appropriate that on moving any application in decided cases, the Registry itself may tag record of the decided matter relating to application with
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.