Dismissed

Om Prakash Bairwa Son of Shri Dhanna Lal Bairwa v. Vinod Kumar Rajoria Son of Shri Phool Chand

Rajasthan HC22 Feb 2022SAW/27/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted leave to the appellant to appeal against two orders of the Single Judge. It dismissed the appeal, holding the appellant was not a proper party to the underlying disciplinary proceedings and disagreed entertaining the challenge to orders where outcomes were not yet finalized.

What did the court decide?

Leave to appeal on both challenged orders was granted; however, the substantive appeal was dismissed.

Om Prakash Bairwa Son of Shri Dhanna Lal Bairwa… — Writ and Judicial Review | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 27/2022

¶3

Om Prakash Bairwa Son Of Shri Dhanna Lal Bairwa, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of F-24, Lal Kothi Scheme, Jaipur.

¶4

----Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

Vinod Kumar Rajoria Son Of Shri Phool Chand, Aged About 46 Years, Resident Of Ward No. 17 (Old No. 13) Main Indira Market, Chaksu, Distt. Jaipur (Raj.)

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Local Self Department, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶8

The Director, Local Self Department, G-3, Rajmahal Residencial Area, C-Scheme, Near Civil Line Phatak, Jaipur.

¶9

The Deputy Director (Regional), Local Self Department, Near Panch Batti, M.i. Road, Jaipur.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Appellant(s) : Ms. Anita Aggarwal with Mr. Laxmi Kant For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jai Singh Rathore on behalf of Mr. Prahlad Sharma

¶12

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

¶13

Order

¶14

22/02/2022

¶15

The appeal is filed by a person who is not a party to the writ petition. He has therefore filed an application (No.1/2022) for leave to appeal. In this appeal the appellant has challenged two orders passed by the Single Judge; one is dated 01.10.2021 by which in the writ petition filed by the respondent No.1 herein the learned Single Judge issued notices and stayed the order dated 08.09.2021. The other order which the appellant has challenged is

¶16

(2 of 2)

¶17

[SAW-27/2022]

¶18

dated 30.11.2021 by which the learned Single Judge though was of the opinion that appellant is neither necessary nor a proper party, allowed the applicant to be an intervenor.

¶19

Ideally for two separate orders the appellant had to file two separate appeals. However to avoid technicality we have heard learned advocate for the appellant against both the orders. Leave to appeal is granted. The application (No.1/2022) stands allowed.

¶20

We are not inclined to entertain the appellant's challenge to either of the two orders. So far as the order dated 01.10.2021 is concerned the same is only an ex parte order and further bi parte hearing is yet to take place before the Single Judge. So far as the order dated 30.11.2021 is concerned we agree with the view of the learned Single Judge that appellant is neither necessary nor a proper party. The issue raised by the petitioner is against the department. He has been served with a notice by the department for taking disciplinary action for having more than two children. As a complainant the appellant may address as an intervenor but has no right to be a party.

¶21

In the result the appeal is dismissed.

¶22

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

¶23

(AKIL KURESHI),CJ

¶24

Kamlesh Kumar/36

Om Prakash Bairwa Son of Shri Dhanna Lal Bairwa v. Vinod Kumar Rajoria Son of Shri Phool Chand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Om Prakash Bairwa Son of Shri Dhanna Lal Bairwa v. Vinod Kumar Rajoria Son of Shri Phool Chand

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

Ramji Lal S/O Bhanwar Lal Jaat Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhagwan Singh S/O Shri Puranmal Vs State of Rajasthan

Upendra Dhayal S/O Sh. Gheesaram Dhayal Vs State of Rajasthan

Paras Kumar Jain Son of Shanti Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Navsarthak Foundation Vs the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment Corporation Limited Vs Uttam Distilleries Ltd.