[2023/RJJP/000625]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14590/2011

Mohanlal Dhabai S/o Shri Behrulal Dhabai, Village Hawala

Hawala Khurd, Post Badi Dist. Udaipur

----Petitioner

Versus

1.

Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Ajmer

2.

Assistant Engineer Pavs Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd,

Badgaon, Udaipur

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. Ashok Mishra

For Respondent(s)

:

Ms. Anuradha Upadhyay

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

Order

27/01/2023

Instant petition has been filed with the following

prayer:

“It is therefore humbly prayed that your Lord

may graciously be pleased to accept and allow

this writ petition and to call and examine the

record of the case and to accept and allow the

writ petition and to issue appropriate writ,

direction and order in the nature thereof:

I) quash and set aside the order dated 22.7.2010

of respondent No.2.

ii) to direct the respondents to reinstate the

petitioner in the service will all consequential

benefits.

Any other order or directions which may deem fir

and proper may also be passed in favour of the

petitioner in the interest of justice.”

[2023/RJJP/000625]

(2 of 3)

[CW-14590/2011]

Counsel for the petitioner submits that against the

impugned order dated 22.07.2010 passed by the Assistant

Engineer (PAVS) Ajmer Vidhut Vitran Nigam Ltd. Badgaon,

Udaipur (for short ‘AVVNL Udaipur’) the petitioner submitted an

appeal before the appellate officer i.e. Superintending Engineer

(UC), Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Udaipur on 21.03.2011 by

registered post. Counsel submits that when the said appeal was

not decided by the appellate authority, the petitioner served

registered legal notice to the authority on 10.06.2011. A request

was made to decide the said appeal within a period of seven days

from the date of receipt of notice. Counsel submits that when no

heed was paid by the appellate authority, he approached this

Court by challenging the same impugned order dated 22.07.2010

passed by the authority.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits

that the petitioner has not submitted appeal and no appeal is

pending before the appellate authority.

This Court finds no substance in the argument raised by

the counsel for the respondents that no appeal was submitted by

the petitioner before the appellate authority. The document

Annexure -7 annexed with the writ petition clearly indicates that

the appeal was submitted against the impugned order dated

22.07.2010 to the appellate officer i.e. Superintending Engineer

(UC) Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Udaipur by Registered

Post on 21.03.2011. When this appeal was not decided by the

appellate authority, a registered legal notice was also given on

10.06.2011 and this fact is clear from the document Annexure – 8

annexed with the writ petition.

[2023/RJJP/000625]

(3 of 3)

[CW-14590/2011]

It appears that the appeal against the impugned order

dated 22.07.2010 is pending before the appellate authority of

Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Udaipur.

The appellate authority is directed to decide the

pending appeal expeditiously as early as possible not beyond the

period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of

this order.

With the aforesaid observations, instant petition as well

as the stay application and all pending applications stand disposed

of.

It goes without saying that the petitioner would be at

liberty to raise all legal submissions available with him before the

appellate authority.

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

KuD/19