The High Court held that the SDO (Civil) erred in deciding an appeal on merits when neither party appeared. The order was set aside and the matter remitted for hearing.
Order dated 30.9.2004 passed by SDO (Civil), Barsar set aside; matter remanded to SDO for hearing after giving parties opportunity to appear; petitioner to appear on 17.1.2011.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CMPMO No. 38 of 2005
Date of decision: 8.12.2010
Kansh Raj
…. Petitioner
Versus
Gram Panchayat, Pahloo & anr.
….. Respondents
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting? No
For the petitioner: Ms.Vidushi Sharma, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr.R.K.Gautam, Sr.Advocate with Ms.Archana Dutt Advocate.
_____________________________________________ Deepak Gupta, J.(Oral)
2
Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Barsar under Section 12(3) of the H.P Panchayati Raj Act.
3
appear before the SDO(Civil) on 17.1.2011. In case the petitioner does not appear before the SDO (Civil) then the appeal shall be dismissed in default and it will be presumed that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the case.
The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid
terms. No order as to costs.
December 8, 2010 ( Deepak Gupta ) (m) Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a Sub-divisional Officer could decide an appeal on merits when neither the petitioner nor the respondent appeared or presented arguments?
Whether an appeal filed against the order of a Gram Panchayat was correctly dismissed on merits without hearing the parties?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Kansh Raj
Gram Panchayat, Pahloo
Deepak Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
