In a writ restoration petition, the Rajasthan High Court dismissed the application after finding the petitioner's counsel absent during the hearing on the restoration date.
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
D.B. Writ Restoration No. 18/2023
Poona Ram Choudhary S/o Lakha Ram Choudhary, Aged About 58 Years, Income Tax Officer, Aayakar Bhawan, Jodhpur-342010.
----Petitioner
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : None For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sunil Bhandari
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT
Order
29/05/2023
It is noticed that this Court vide order dated 15.03.2022 has dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner for want of prosecution, however, later on the writ petition came to be restored on 23.5.2022 on an application filed by the petitioner. Again on 1.2.2023 none had appeared on behalf of the petitioner, therefore, the writ petition was again dismissed for want of prosecution.
Though the petitioner has moved this application for restoring the writ petition, yet none is present on his behalf to press the said restoration application.
[WRES-18/2023]
(2 of 2)
In such circumstances, we have no option except to dismiss the restoration application No. 18/2023. Hence, the same is dismissed.
(YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT),J
(VIJAY BISHNOI),J
64-Arti/-
Poona Ram Choudhary
Union Of India
Vijay Bishnoi
Yogendra Kumar Purohit
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
