Allowed

Smt. Mamta Bansal v. Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd.

Rajasthan HC5 Mar 2021CW/195/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of two connected writ petitions. It allowed the petitioner the liberty to file a detailed application for cross-examination and confirmed an interim order directing the lower court to decide a temporary injunction application without being influenced by the filing of an appeal.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to file a fresh cross-examination application; interim order confirming the direct lower court to decide the temporary injunction application unaffected by appeals.

Smt. Mamta Bansal Vs Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

¶2

JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 195/2021

¶4

Smt. Mamta Bansal W/o Ujjawal Bansal, Aged About 37 Years, By Caste Agarwal, Resident Of Ward No. 15, Pilibanga, Tehsil Pilibanga, District Hanumangarh (Rajasthan).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Through Executive Engineer, Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Hanumangarh Junction.

¶8

Chief Accounts Officer, (B And R) Jodhpur Discom, Jodhpur. Email Id [email protected].

¶9

Assistant Engineer, Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. (Rural), Hanumangarh Junction.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

Connected With

¶12

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13366/2020

¶13

Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Through Executive Engineer Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Hanumangarh Junction

¶14

Chief Accountant (B And R), Jodhpur Discom, Jodhpur, Email Id [email protected]

¶15

Assistant Engineer, Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Hanumangarh Junction (Rural)

¶16

----Petitioners

¶17

Versus

¶18

Mamta W/o Ujjawal, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Ward No. 15, Pilibanga, Tehsil Pilibanga, District Hanumangarh (Raj.)

¶19

----Respondent

¶20

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Nahar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahendra Vishnoi

¶21

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

Order

05/03/2021

(2 of 4)

[CW-195/2021]

In wake of onslaught of COVID-19, abundant caution is being taken while hearing the matters in Court.

¶27

In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 195/2021

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the application for cross-examination of the respondent upon the affidavit filed has been wrongly dismissed, as there is a right of cross-examination to the petitioner and the order dated 14.12.2020 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge, Hanumangarh is a non-speaking order.

¶29

Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the application itself does not have any contents and is a very vague and general application, which does not have any specification as to the manner, in which, the cross-examination is desired by the petitioner.

¶30

This Court, on examining the record of the case, finds that the application filed by the petitioner for cross-examination does not contain even a single fact, upon which, the cross-examination can be permitted, and thus, the application itself is so vague that disallowing the cross-examination on such application is justified.

¶31

However, in the interest of justice, the present writ petition is disposed of while giving liberty to the petitioner to file fresh application for cross-examination by giving detailed reasons and specifications as to what are the issues, on which, he seeks crossexamination, which shall be decided by the learned court below strictly in accordance with law.

¶32

Stay petition also stands disposed of accordingly.

¶33

In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13366/2020

¶34

On 08.01.2021 this Hon'ble Court had passed the following

order :-

(3 of 4)

[CW-195/2021]

"Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that earlier the petitioners-JdVVNL appointed M/s. Jodhpur DRK Pvt. Ltd.,Jodhpur as Local Service Provider (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the LSP’) for the purpose of collection of electricity bills’ payment through e-Mitra Kiosk and the said collection work was assigned tothe respondent, who operates e-Mitra Kiosk, on behalf of M/s. Jodhpur DRK Pvt. Ltd., Jodhpur. It is submitted that later on, M/s. Jodhpur DRK Pvt. Ltd., Jodhpur stopped its work as LSP, therefore, the petitioners-JdVVNL appointed M/s. eGgron Indiatech Pvt. Ltd.as LSP for collection of electricity bills’ payment through e-MitraKiosk for Sub Division A.En. Haumangarh (Rural) and A.En. Tibbi and M/s. SVG Express Services Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur for Sub Division A.En. Bhadra and A.En. Pallu.

¶39

It is further submitted that after stopping the work by M/s. Jodhpur DRK Pvt. Ltd., Jodhpur as LSP, the respondent started working for M/s. SVG Express Services Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur and did not work for M/s. eGron Indiatech Pvt. Ltd., which was appointed as LSP for A.En Hanumangarh (Rural). It is also submitted that asM/s. SVG Express Services Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur was not appointed asLSP for A.En. Hanumangarh (Rural), where the respondent has setup her e-Mitra Kiosk, the petitionersJdVVNL could not continue e-Mitra Kiosk of respondent in Sub Division A.En. Hanumangarh(Rural).

¶40

It is argued that District Judge, Hanumangarh has failed to take into consideration this aspect of the matter and passed the impugned order dated 15.10.2020 in illegal manner.

¶41

Issue notice. Issue notice of stay petition as well, returnable on 02.02.2021.

¶42

In the meantime, the effect and operation of order dated15.10.2020 passed by the District Judge, Hanumangarh shall remain stayed. However, it is made clear that the Additional Civil Judge, Hanumangarh may

¶43

(4 of 4)

¶44

[CW-195/2021]

¶45

proceed with the temporary injunction application filed on behalf of the respondent along with her suit. "

¶46

Learned counsel for the parties are in agreement that the writ petition may be disposed of while confirming the order dated 08.01.2021 as final order and directing the learned court below to decide the temporary injunction application strictly in accordance with law without being influenced by filing of any appeal against the temporary injunction application.

¶47

In light of such joint prayer, the present writ petition is disposed of, while directing the learned court below to decide the temporary injunction application strictly in accordance with law without getting influenced by filing of any appeal. However, the order dated 08.01.2021 passed by this Ho'ble Court as an interim measure shall remain in currency till the temporary injunction application is finally decided.

¶48

Stay petition also stands disposed of accordingly.

¶49

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J.

¶50

21-22-Sudheer/-

Smt. Mamta Bansal v. Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Mamta Bansal v. Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tushar Tiwari Vs the Registrar, Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnana Raj. Ayurvedic University

Pawan Kumar Vs Appellate Rent Tribunal

Pankhi Vs State of Rajsthan

Khemraj Vs the State of Rajasthan

Mana Ram Vs Jodhpur Development Authority

Shri Guru Teg Bahadur Sahib Society Vs the Presiding Officer, Rent Tribunal