Dismissed

Dipak Kumar Roy @ Ray v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC9 Jul 2021WP(C)/6090/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa dismissed the writ petition by learned counsel's address on false affidavit and gross delay. The court found the petitioners had obtained a certified copy of the impugned order in 2017, contradicting their current claim of lack of knowledge. A fine of Rs.5,000 was imposed.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed; Rs. 5,000 imposed as cost to be deposited in Govt. of Odisha COVID-19 fund within 7 days.

Dipak Kumar Roy @ Ray Vs State of Odisha — Writ and Judicial Review | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C). No.6090 OF 2021

¶3

Dipak Kumar Roy @ Ray & Others

¶4

..... Petitioners

¶5

Mr.A.K.Biswal, Advocate

¶6

- Versus-

¶7

State of Odisha & Others ….. Opposite parties

¶8

Mr. R.P.Mohapatra Addl. Govt. Advocate

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE BISWANATH RATH

¶10

ORDER

¶11

09.07.2021

¶12

Order No. 1. This matter is taken up through video conferencing.

¶13

¶14

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶15

3 . Even though a statement is made that after the hearing was concluded in R.P.Case No.154 of 2013, petitioners attempted for certified copy of the final order in the year, 2017. But, in fact, there is no such copy application available in the writ petition. Further, this Court on perusal of the impugned order finds the impugned order was passed on 28.4.2017 i.e. about four years back.

¶16

4 . Sri Biswal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in his attempt to satisfy delay in filing the writ petition submits that petitioners were not aware of the judgment impugned and it is only after getting the certified copy in 2021, they have filed the present writ petition. Sri Biswal thus claimed that there is virtually no delay as it is well within reasonable time from the

¶17

knowledge of the petitioners.

¶18

5. From perusal of the impugned order this Court finds the matter involved herein was decided on contest of the petitioners involved herein. Statement of the petitioners that after only coming to know about such judgment in the year 2021, they applied for certified copy of the judgment and filed herein. This submission of the petitioners appears to be absolutely false on the premises that petitioners themselves have applied for the certified copy of the judgment in the year, 2017 i.e. in the month of May, 2017. Not only that the petitioners have cleared all court fees involving the certified copy on 25.5.2017 and the certified copy of the impugned order was also granted on 27.5.2017. The writ petition is based on absolute false claim involving four years delay therein.

¶19

6. For the petitioners filing false affidavit and making false submission on the question of delay in filing the writ petition apparently false on the face of the certified copy at back page of the impugned order enclosed in the writ petition, the writ petition stands dismissed on both counts, on account of false affidavit of the petitioners and on account of gross delay. For filing writ on false affidavit in this Court, this Court imposes a cost of Rs.5,000/(Rupees Five thousand) on the petitioners to be deposited in COVID-19 fund of Government of Odisha within a period of seven days failure of which it shall be collected as public revenue.

¶20

7. As the restrictions due to resurgence of COVID-19 situation are continuing, learned counsel for the parties

¶21

may utilize a printout of the order available in the High Court’s website, at par with certified copy, subject to attestation by the concerned advocate, in the manner prescribed vide Court’s Notice No.4587, dated 25^th March, 2020 as modified by Court’s Notice No. 4798 dated 15^th April, 2021.

¶22

(BISWANATH RATH) JUDGE

¶23

sks

Dipak Kumar Roy @ Ray v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dipak Kumar Roy @ Ray v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Malika Naik Vs Basudev Satpathy

Bharati Sahoo Vs Anil Kumar Samal

Saik Sabaj Vs State of Orissa

Tapabandhu Swain Vs State of Odisha

Karunakar Mishra Vs Padmalabha Mishra

Sujata Das Vs State of Odisha