A special intra-court writ appeal was dismissed as infructuous because the appellant participated in the underlying proceedings in obedience to the impugned order despite the challenge.
The appeal was dismissed as infructuous. Liberty was reserved to approach the court if a fresh cause of action arises.
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.
D.B.Special Appeal (Writ) No.535/2014. Bablu Saini & Another. VERSUS State of Raj. & Others.
05.11.2014.
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE J.K.RANKA
Mr.Ram Pratap Saini, Counsel for appellants.
Counsel for appellant, on instructions, submits that however the appellants have challenged the order of ld.Single Judge which is impugned in the instant proceedings, but at the same time, they were advised to go ahead in terms of order of the court and pursuant thereto, they had participated in the proceedings and on account of these change in circumstances, the present intra-court appeal has become infructuous. However, counsel submits that as regards outcome of appellants' participation, he may be granted liberty to avail remedy, if any adverse order is passed against them.
In view of the above, the instant intra-court appeal is dismissed as having become infructuous and as regards liberty, sought for is concerned, if there is a fresh cause of action, one always has the liberty to avail remedy, which the law permits to him.
(J.K.RANKA),J. (AJAY RASTOGI),J.
All corrections made in judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed. Solanki DS, Sr.P.A.
Bablu Saini
State of Raj.
AJAY RASTOGI
J.K.RANKA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
