Dismissed

Dy.Conservator of Forest, Jln v. Prabhu Narain

Rajasthan HC27 Jan 2015SAW/1064/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The bench condoned the delay in filing an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act with the production of an affidavit. The intra-court appeal was dismissed as there was no substance to grant indulgence, though a review application liberty was granted to the appellant since the lower court order relied on a government circular without examining merits.

What did the court decide?

Delay condoned under S.5 of the Limitation Act. Intra-court appeal dismissed with liberty to file review application before the Single Judge.

Dy.Conservator of Forest, Jln Vs Prabhu Narain — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2015)

¶1

-1-

¶2

D.B.Special Appeal (Writ) No.1064/2014. Dy.Conservator of Forest. VERSUS Prabhu Narain & Anr.

¶3

D.B.Special Appeal (Writ) No.1064/2014. Dy.Conservator of Forest. VERSUS Prabhu Narain & Another.

¶4

27.01.2015.

¶5

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE J.K.RANKA

¶6

Mr.N.K.Bhatt, Counsel for appellant. Mr.Suresh Kashyap, Counsel for respondent.

¶7

¶8

Heard counsel for the parties on the application filed u/S.5 of the Limitation Act.

¶9

This court is satisfied with the explanation furnished for the delay, duly supported with the affidavit.

¶10

Accordingly, the application u/S.5 of the Limitation Act stands allowed and the delay is accordingly condoned.

¶11

Counsel for appellant submits that the order impugned dt.28.01.2014 was passed by the ld.Single Judge on consent of the parties but it appears that due to some inadvertence order impugned came to be passed placing reliance on the circular issued by the State Government dt.23.10.2013.

¶12

Counsel submits that even in terms of circular dt.23.10.2013, the case of workmen-respondents was not covered for grant of reinstatement, as observed by the ld.Single Judge under order impugned.

¶13

In the instant case, merits have not been looked into and matter has been decided with the consent of the parties relying upon the circular dt.23.10.2013. It will not be appropriate for this court to examine the matter on merits and as regards circular dt.23.10.2013 is concerned, it is always open for the

¶14

-2-

¶15

D.B.Special Appeal (Writ) No.1064/2014. Dy.Conservator of Forest. VERSUS Prabhu Narain & Anr.

¶16

parties to address before the ld.Single Judge.

¶17

Consequently, we do not find substance to grant indulgence in the instant intra-court appeal, however, grant liberty to the appellant of filing review application before the ld.Single Judge, if so advised.

¶18

Accordingly, the instant intra-court appeal is dismissed with liberty, as prayed.

¶19

(J.K.RANKA),J.

¶20

(AJAY RASTOGI),J.

¶21

All corrections made in judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed. Solanki DS, Sr.P.A.

Dy.Conservator of Forest, Jln v. Prabhu Narain

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dy.Conservator of Forest, Jln v. Prabhu Narain

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

Phoolam Ram Saini Vs R S R T C Jaipur and Anr.

B N Vidyashankara Vs Mrs Neelam Shekhawat Ors.

Ashok Kumar Bairwa Vs Director Printing and Anr.

Krishnakant Pareek Vs State Revenu Departmentors

Madhav Ram Sharma Vs State Home Departmentors

Jain Shiksha Samiti Vs Hem Chand and Ors.