Dismissed

State of Uttarakhand v. Ravindra Singh Rawat

Uttarakhand HC2 May 2019SPA/312/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Four special appeals were filed against orders described as consent orders. The High Court observed that the subject matter was covered by a prior judgment and dismissed the appeals as not maintainable while granting liberty to seek review.

What did the court decide?

The special appeals were dismissed as not maintainable; the appellants were granted liberty to seek review of the orders under appeal.

State of Uttarakhand Vs Ravindra Singh… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Uttarakhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

¶2

Special Appeal No. 312 of 2019

¶3

Versus

¶4

Ravindra Singh Rawat & Another … Respondents

¶5

Sri Anil Kumar Bisht, Standing Counsel, for the State/appellants. Sri Kishore Kumar, Advocate, holding brief of Sri M.C. Pant, Advocate, for the respondent-writ petitioner. Sri Pankaj Kumar, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Neeraj Garg, Advocate, for respondent no. 2.

¶6

With

¶7

Special Appeal No. 314 of 2019

¶8

State of Uttarakhand & Others … Appellants

¶9

Versus

¶10

Sudhir Lakhera & Another … Respondents

¶11

¶12

Special Appeal No. 315 of 2019

¶13

State of Uttarakhand & Others … Appellants

¶14

Versus

¶15

Dipti Martolia & Another … Respondents

¶16

Sri Anil Kumar Bisht, Standing Counsel, for the State/appellants.

¶17

Sri Kishore Kumar, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Lalit Samant, Advocate, for the respondent-writ petitioner. Sri Pankaj Kumar, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Neeraj Garg, Advocate, for respondent no. 2.

¶18

Special Appeal No. 316 of 2019

¶19

State of Uttarakhand & Others … Appellants

¶20

Versus

¶21

Devendra Thapliyal & Another … Respondents

¶22

¶23

¶24

Special Appeal No. 321 of 2019

¶25

State of Uttarakhand & Others … Appellants

¶26

Versus

¶27

Deepak Rawat & Another … Respondents

¶28

¶29

Coram: Hon’ble Ramesh Ranganathan, C.J. Hon’ble Narayan Singh Dhanik, J.

¶30

Ramesh Ranganathan, C.J. (Oral)

¶31

Applications, seeking condonation of delay in preferring these appeals, are not opposed by Sri Kishore Kumar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-writ petitioners, and the delay is, therefore, condoned. Applications made, therefor, stand disposed of.

¶32

Since these Special Appeals are itself being finally disposed of, we see no reason to defer hearing of these appeals to enable the deficiencies pointed out by the Registry to be rectified.

¶33

Both Sri Anil Kumar Bisht, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant-State of Uttarakhand, and Sri Kishore Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-writ petitioners,

¶34

¶35

would agree that the subject matter of these Special Appeals is covered by the order passed by us in Special Appeal No. 162 of 2019 dated 15.03.2019.

¶36

Following the order passed in Special Appeal No. 162 of 2019 dated 15.03.2019, and in terms thereof, these appeals are also dismissed as not maintainable since the orders under appeal are consent orders. The appellants are, however, granted liberty to seek review of the orders under appeal.

¶37

5. No costs.

¶38

(N.S. Dhanik, J.) (Ramesh Ranganathan, C.J.) 2.5.2019 2.5.2019

¶39

2.5.2019

¶40

Prabodh

State of Uttarakhand v. Ravindra Singh Rawat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Uttarakhand v. Ravindra Singh Rawat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of Uttarakhand Vs Gopal Singh Bisht

Sanjay Narang Vs Union Of India and Others

Ram Sevak Vs State of Uttarakhand

Director Of Income Tax international Taxation-ii New Delhi Vs M/s Gil Mauritius Holding Ltd.

State of Uttarakhand Vs Pradeep Kumar Chauhan

State of Uttarakhand Vs Dipti Martolia