The single judge recalled an order dismissing a writ petition as infructuous, restoring the petition to the file for listing. The respondent raised no objection.
The order dated 28.09.2022 in WPC (OAC) No.145 of 2019 is recalled and the writ petition is restored to the original file for listing.
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 RVWPET No.163 of 2024
Biswajit Gardia …. Petitioner
Mr. Pradeep Kumar Khuntia, Advocate -versus-
State of Odisha and others …. Opposite Parties
Ms. Saswata Patnaik, Addl. Govt. Advocate for O.P. No.1
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN
Order No.
ORDER 04.09.2024
This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.
“2. WPC (OAC) No.145 of 2019 was disposed of by an order dated 28.09.2022which reads as under:-
“This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. It is contended that by efflux of time, the writ petition has become infructuous.
Page 1 of 3
3. In view of the above submission, the writ petition stands disposed of as infructuous.”
3. It is the case of the appellant that the case had, in fact, not become infructuous and the cause of action was surviving on the said date.
4. Instead of seeking review of the said order, the appellant filed an interlocutory application, in the disposed of matter seeking recall of the said order dated 28.09.2022 passed in WPC(OAC) No.145 of 2019, vide I.A. No.200 of 2023, which has been dismissed by an order dated 17.11.2023 by the learned Single Judge in following terms:-
2. Heard Mr. P.K. Khuntia, learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. The above Interlocutory Application has been filed by the Petitioner seeking recall of the order dated 28th September, 2022.
4. Considering the grounds taken in the application, this Court is not satisfied to recall the said order. Accordingly, the I.A. stands dismissed.”
4. By filing the present intra-court appeal, the appellant has put to challenge the aforesaid two orders.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has submitted the learned counsel representing the appellant had died when WPC (OAC) No.145 of 2019 was taken up by this Court on 28.09.2022.
6. Be that as it may, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned orders passed by the learned Single Judge, in the present intra-court appeal. We, however, make it clear that the appellant shall be at liberty to file a review application seeking review of the order dated 28.09.2022 on the grounds which may be available to him.
7. Accordingly, the writ appeal stands dismissed.”
2.1. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that having granted liberty in the aforesaid writ appeal, this Review
Page 2 of 3
Petition has been filed for recall of the order dated 28.09.2022 passed in WPC (OAC) No.145 of 2019.
(M.S. Raman) Judge
Suchitra
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Signed by: SUCHITRA BEHERA Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, C UTT ACK Date: 04-Sep-2024 19:01:09
Page 3 of 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should restore a writ petition disposed of as infructuous upon the death of the petitioner's counsel.
Whether an interlocutory application filed to recall the disposal order was correct instead of a review application.
Biswajit Gardia
State of Odisha
MURAHARI SRI RAMAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
