Single judge dismissed the review petition. Condonation of 352 days delay was rejected as not satisfactorily explained. The petition was further dismissed on merits for lack of error apparent on the face of the record.
Application for condonation of delay rejected; review petition dismissed on delay and merit.
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 AT JODHPUR
S.B. Writ Review No. 178/2018
Municipal Board Deedwana, Through Its Executive Officer Sahdev Charan S/o Shri Vijaydan Charan, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of Deedwana, District Nagaur
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. K.N. Joshi For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI
Order
01/10/2018
This review petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking review of the order dated 8.8.2017 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3350/1998 whereby the above writ petition was dismissed by this Court.
There is delay of 352 days in filing this review petition and an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been filed in which it is averred that against the order dated 8.8.2017 passed by this Court, the petitioner preferred D.B. Civil Special Appeal No.683/2018, however, the same was dismissed vide order dated 01.8.2018 while giving liberty to the petitioner to move
(2 of 2)
[WRW-178/2018]
review petition. It is submitted that due to pendency of aforesaid special appeal, the review petition could not be filed within time.
Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and after going through the averments made in the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, this Court is of the opinion that the delay of 352 days in filing the review petition has not been satisfactorily explained by the petitioner. The said appeal has been dismissed as withdrawn and the Division Bench has not observed or given a direction to file review petition. The factum of pendency of special appeal against the impugned order does not absolve the petitioner from satisfactorily explaining the delay. Hence, no case for condonation of 352 days’ delay in filing this review petition is made out. Therefore, the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is rejected.
Moreover on merits also, I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, however, the petitioner has failed to point out any error apparent on the face of record in the impugned judgment dated 8.8.2017. Hence, no case for interference in this review petition is made out.
The review petition is, therefore, dismissed on the ground of delay as well on merit.
(VIJAY BISHNOI),J
Babulal/10
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay of 352 days in filing the review petition can be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
Whether any error apparent on the face of the record exists in the impugned judgment.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Municipal Board Deedwana, Through Its Executive Officer Sahdev Charan
Addl. Divisional Commissioner, Ajmer
Addl. District Collector, Nagaur
Smt. Sushila Devi
Ganpatlal
VIJAY BISHNOI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
