The High Court dismissed the review/recall application as not maintainable because the Supreme Court had not yet reviewed the judgment in Dev Krishna Dargoa & Ors., rendering the connected review petitions premature.
The review/recall application was dismissed in terms of the order dated 17th November 2016.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B.Writ Miscellaneous Application No. 253 / 2016
in
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16861/2015
Santosh Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Pratya Rram Yadav, resident of Village and Post Khohara Malwali, tehsil Laxmangarh, district Alwar. At Present working as Forest Guard in the Office of the Dy. Gonservator of Forest (Tiger Project) Sariska, Alwar.
.....Petitioner/Non-applicant
Versus
1.State of Rajasthan through the Principal Secretary, Forests Department, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur.
2.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Van Bhawan, Jaipur.
3.The Deputy Conservator of Forest (Tiger Project), Sariska, Alwar.
...Respondents/Applicants
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Surya Pratap Singh on behalf of
Mr. Inderjeet Singh, AAG
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA
Order
06/03/2017
Though, the matter has been listed in the defect(s) Category. However, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that identical controversy has already been considered and adjudicated upon in a batch of review/writ petitions lead case being S.B. Civil Review Petition No.212/2016 (Hanuman Sahay Jat & Ors. Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.), decided on 17th November, 2016, observing thus:
(2 of 2)
[WMAP-253/2016]
“The writ petitions were disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to make a representation and the respondents were directed to find out as to whether the case of the petitioner is governed by the judgment in the case of Dev Krishna Dargoa & Ors. (supra) and, if it is found covered by the judgment aforesaid, then to give benefits.
The State Government later on filed a review petition in the case of Dev Krishna Dargoa & Ors. (supra) and is pending consideration before the Principal Seat at Jodhpur. The recalling of the order has been sought only on that ground without realising that if the judgment in the case of Dev Krishna Dargoa & Ors. (supra) is reviewed, obviously it would be considered to be final and, thereupon, even as per the direction given in the order, sought to be reviewed, the State Government can very well deny the benefits claimed by the petitioner/s after consideration of the case. If the order passed in the case of Dev Krishna Dargoa & Ors. (supra) is maintained then also the representation would be considered to find out as to whether the judgment aforesaid applies to the petitioner/s or not.
In the light of the aforesaid and, as, at this stage, when the order in the case of Dev Krishna Dargoa & Ors. (supra) has not yet been reviewed, I do not find these review petitions to be maintainable. It is also for the reason that the State Government earlier complied the judgment in the case of Dev Krishna Dargoa & Ors. (supra) and, thereupon, filed the review petition thus all the review petitions are dismissed at this stage.
However, the respondents-applicants would be at liberty to file review petition/s afresh, if the judgment in the case of Dev Krishna Dargoa & Ors. (supra) is reviewed and the State Government finds complications in the matter.
A copy of this order be placed in each connected file.”
In view of the above, the review/recall application is dismissed in terms of the order dated 17th November, 2106, as extracted hereinabove.
(VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA)J.
Pcg/2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the review/recall application is maintainable given the status of the prior judgment in Dev Krishna Dargoa & Ors.
Whether the petitioners are entitled to the benefits under the precedent of Dev Krishna Dargoa & Ors. at this stage.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Hanuman Sahay Jat & Ors. Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.Referred¶18
Hanuman Sahay Jat & Ors. Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.
Dev Krishna Dargoa & Ors.Referred¶19
Dev Krishna Dargoa & Ors.
Santosh Kumar Yadav
State of Rajasthan
Veerendr Singh Siradhana
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
