Dismissed

State of Rajasthan v. Asha

Rajasthan HC11 Feb 2021CR/7/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan dismissed the civil revision petition. Relying on a previously decided revision petition (District Collector, Rajsamand v. Magana), the Court held that the challenge to the show-cause notice had no substance, as no remedy exists under the Rules for such challenges and pecuniary jurisdiction could not be challenged at this stage. Consequently, the petition was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The civil revision petition is dismissed.

State of Rajasthan Vs Asha — Rajasthan HC (2021) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 7/2021

¶3

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶4

Mining Engineer, Rajsamand

¶5

Director, Mines And Geology Department, Udaipur

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

Asha D/o Ramdev, Sanjay Colony, Bhilwara

¶9

		----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. D.S. Jasol.
For Respondent(s)	:

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

¶11

Order

¶12

11/02/2021

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in a similar nature revision petition wherein, the trial court had passed similar order, the revision petition filed by the petitioner -State has been decided by this Court by order dated 09.02.2021, wherein the revision petition has been dismissed.

¶14

This Court in District Collector, Rajsamand V. Magana: S.B. Civil Revision Petition NO.08/2021 decided on 09.02.2021, interalia came to the following conclusion:-

¶15

“I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and have perused the material available on record.

¶16

The provisions of Section 41(h) of the Act, apparently would have no application, inasmuch as, the challenge laid is to the show-cause notice and admittedly against the show-cause notice, except for appearing before the authorities, no

¶17

(2 of 2)

¶18

[CR-7/2021]

¶19

remedy has been provided under the Rules and as such the plea raised in this regard has no substance.

¶20

So far as the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Court is concerned, admittedly based on the quantum of demand raised in the notice, the jurisdiction of the court cannot be challenged at this stage and as such the plea raised in this regard also has no substance.

¶21

Consequently, no case for interference in the order impugned is made out. There is no substance in the revision petition. The same is, therefore, dismissed.”

¶22

In view of the submissions made, following the order in the case of Magnu (Supra) the present revision petition is also dismissed.

¶23

(ARUN BHANSALI),J

¶24

9-pradeep/-

State of Rajasthan v. Asha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Rajasthan v. Asha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Preetpal Singh Vs Mahaveer and Ors.

Daulat Singh Vs Municipal Board, Rajsamand

Dr. Bela Nehra Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahendra Kumar and Ors. Vs Smt. Maya Devi and Ors.

Lali Vs Kanhaiya Lal and Anr.

Mahendra Kumar and Ors. Vs Smt. Maya Devi and Ors.