Disposed

Dharampal Jat v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC4 Mar 2024SAW/279/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The appellant withdrew a special appeal challenging a single bench order that dismissed a writ petition for lack of territorial jurisdiction and imposed costs. The Division Bench allowed the withdrawal and exempted the costs, granting liberty to file a fresh petition in the proper jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

Exemption of cost of Rs. 10,000/-; liberty to file fresh writ petition granted.

Dharampal Jat Vs State of Rajasthan — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:10707-DB]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 279/2024

¶4

Dharampal Jat S/o Shri Shambhu Dayal Jat, Aged About 41 Years, Ward No 11, Siwag Bhawan, Tehsil Bansur Dhani, Rampur, District Alwar (Rajasthan).

¶5

----Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Local Self Department, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶8

The Director Cum Special Secretary, Directorate Local Self Department, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶9

The District Collector, Ajmer (Rajasthan).

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ankur Mathur For Respondent(s) :

¶12

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS

¶13

Order

¶14

04/03/2024

¶15

The petitioner has filed the writ petition with the following

¶16

prayers:-

¶17

(i) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the impugned suspension order dated 23.01.2024 (Annexure-6) passed by respondent No.3 may kindly be quashed and set aside.

¶18

(ii) Any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.

¶19

(iii) Costs of the writ petition may kindly be awarded to the petitioner.

¶20

[2024:RJ-JD:10707-DB]

¶21

[SAW-279/2024]

¶22

(2 of 4)

¶23

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, learned Single Bench has passed the order dated 20.02.2024, whereby the stay application has been rejected. The relevant portion of the impugned order is reproduced as under:-

¶24

“4. Believing the statement of Mr. Mathur, the Court has passed an interim order, but while signing the order, the record of the case was perused. On wading through the record, more particularly the charge-sheet and the allegations levelled therein, this Court found that not even an iota of cause of action has arisen in the jurisdiction of the Principal Seat of this High Court.

¶25

Mr. Mathur’s contention that the petition is maintainable at Jodhpur, as the petitioner was having additional charge of Municipal Council, Kuchaman, is absolutely misconceived, rather baseless and amounts to an attempt to mislead the Court.

¶26

The charge-sheet and memorandum of charges does not contain even a whisper of allegation which relates to any work done by the petitioner as a Commissioner for Municipal Council, Kuchaman. Though, a passing reference has been made in the last line of Para No. 2 of the memo of writ petition, but the same seems to have been made only in order to create a cause of action at the Principal Seat. Needless to reiterate that the petitioner is a resident of Alwar; he was working in Ajmer and the impugned order has been passed by the District Collector, Ajmer; all are subject to territorial jurisdiction of Jaipur Bench.

¶27

For the attempt to mislead the Court, the writ petition is dismissed with cost of Rs.10,000/-, to be paid in Bar Council of Rajasthan. The Chairman, Bar Council of Rajasthan shall

¶28

(3 of 4)

¶29

[2024:RJ-JD:10707-DB]

¶30

[SAW-279/2024]

¶31

be free to use the same in any welfare activity for the Advocates.

¶32

The petitioner shall be free to file fresh petition, in accordance with law, if so advised, however, with a copy of the proof of payment of cost. Else, the writ petition shall be registered in defect category.

¶33

Stay application also stands dismissed, accordingly. 10. A copy of this order be sent to Secretary, Bar Council of Rajasthan and Registrar (Judicial) at Jaipur Bench of this Court.

¶34

Challenging the impugned order, the petitioner-appellant has preferred the present special appeal. On 27.02.2024, while issuing notices to the respondents making them returnable on 12.03.2024, it was directed that the effect and operation of the paragraph No.7 of the impugned order dated 20.02.2024 shall remain stayed.

¶35

Today, the matter is listed in the supplementary cause-list with the note that PF and notices have not been filed.

¶36

Upon being asked, learned counsel for the appellant submits that pursuing the present appeal will cause delay in the relief arising out of the adjudication to the present appellant and thus, without going into the merits of the case, he wants to withdraw the present appeal as well as the writ petition with liberty to file fresh petition, as liberty has already been granted to the appellant in paragraph 8 of the impugned order dated 20.02.2024. Learned counsel further submits that he had bonafidely tried to pursue the Court regarding jurisdiction, but unfortunately, could not convince

¶37

(4 of 4) [SAW-279/2024]

¶38

[2024:RJ-JD:10707-DB]

¶39

the Court and thus, the Court construed the same as an attempt to mislead the Court while imposing cost of Rs. 10,000/-. Learned counsel for the appellant further prays that the cost may be waived and petitioner be permitted to file fresh writ petition.

¶40

Accordingly, the present special appeal and writ petition are dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty to file fresh writ petition in accordance with law, if so advised.

¶41

As prayed, the cost of Rs.10,000/- to be paid in Bar Council of Rajasthan, as ordered vide order dated 20.02.2024, is accordingly exempted.

¶42

(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J

¶43

(PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J

¶44

150-Bharti/-

Dharampal Jat v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharampal Jat v. State of Rajasthan

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

Narendra Kumar Choubisa Vs State of Rajasthan

Nema Ram Vs the State of Rajasthan

Jogendra @ Joga Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax- Udaipur Vs M/S Saileela Synthetics Pvt. Ltd.

Mehboob Khan Vs State and Ors.

Manju Vs State of Rajasthan