High Court dismissed the writ appeal against a Single Judge order regarding differential shop rent due to inordinate delay and because interference was not appropriate on merits without creating a precedent.
Writ appeal dismissed on grounds of limitation and merits without creating a precedent.
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 ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.A. No. 118 of 2022
State of Orissa and others
…. Appellants
Mr. Debakanta Mohanty, Additional Government Advocate
-versus-
…. Raghunath Nayak
Respondent
CORAM:
THE CHIEF JUSTICE JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY
ORDER Order No. 14.03.2023 I.A. No.324 of 2022 & W.A. No.118 of 2022 01. 1. There is an inordinate delay of 770 days in filing the present writ appeal even accounting for the COVID-19 period, there still appears to be an inordinate and unexplained delay in filing the writ appeal.
Page 1 of 2
(Dr. S. Muralidhar) Chief Justice
S. Behera
(G. Satapathy)
Judge
Page 2 of 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ appeal filed after a delay of 770 days should be allowed despite settings of law.
Whether the Single Judge's order charging differential rent should be interfered with on merits.
State of Orissa and others
Raghunath Nayak
G. Satapathy
S. Behera
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
