Dismissed

The Chairman S P C a v. the Union of India and Ors.

Jharkhand HC4 Jan 2018C.Rev./78/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The State Secretarily sought review of a writ order on the ground of inability to appear. The High Court held that inability to appear is not a valid ground for review when the order was passed after hearing counsel, dismissing the petition.

What did the court decide?

Petition for review of the impugned order dated 14th May 2015 dismissed as no grounds were made out.

The Chairman S P C a Vs the Union of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Civil Review No. 78 of 2015

¶2

…....

¶3

The Chairman, S.P.C.A. Jharkhand, Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India. --- --- Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The Union of India

¶6

The State of Jharkhand through Chief Secretary

¶7

The Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India.

¶8

The Superintendent of Police, Godda.

¶9

The District, S.P.C.A., through its Chairman-cum-D.C., Godda

¶10

The Department of Animal Husbandry and Fishing, Government of Jharkhand.

¶11

Sudhir Kumar Singh, Inspector, S.P.C.A., Godda.

¶12

Umesh Kumar Singh. --- --- Opp. Parties

¶13

¶14

CORAM : The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh

¶15

--For the Petitioner : Mr. Vikash Kumar, Adv. For the State : J.C. to A.G.

¶16

¶17

05/04.01.2018 Heard counsel for the petitioner.

¶18

The respondent no.3 in the writ petition has sought review of the impugned order dated 14^th May 2015 passed therein inter alia on the ground that he could not be represented on the date on which the writ petition was decided as the list could not be marked.

¶19

This, in any case, is not a ground for review. The order impugned has been passed after due hearing to the parties who were represented through their counsel and also taking note of the fact that the respondent no.3, though represented through their counsel, was not present. The counter affidavit of the respondent no.3 was also taken note of in the order.

¶20

The powers of review are to be exercised to correct the mistake of the Court and not to lightly tinker with the order on account of such pleas taken by one or the other parties to the proceedings. There are no errors apparent on the face of the record or pointed out by the counsel for the petitioner.

¶21

In that view of the matter, no grounds are made out to review the order in question. Accordingly the instant petition is dismissed.

¶22

( Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.)

¶23

Shamim/

The Chairman S P C a v. the Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Chairman S P C a v. the Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lalu Prasad Alias Lalu Prasad Yadav Vs The State Of Jharkhand Through C B I

Lalu Prasad Alias Lalu Prasad Yadav Vs The State Of Jharkhand Through Cbi

Inderjit Thakur Vs Sri Amrendra Pratap Singh Secretary Drinking Water And Sanitation Deptt and Ors.

Ms Hindustan Constructions through Its Proprietor Nakimuddin Vs State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Farooque Khan And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Food Corpn. of India And Ors. Vs Deepak Kumar Singh