Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Himachal Pradesh High Court

State Of H.P. & Others vs Gagan Singh & Others ... on 11 January, 2023

Author: Ajay Mohan Goel

Bench: Ajay Mohan Goel

                                                                           .

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

                                             CMP(M) No.1715 of 2022 in





                                             RPST No.31897 of 2022
                                             Decided on: 11.01.2023

    State of H.P. & others                                    ....Applicants/Petitioners.





                       Versus
    Gagan Singh & others                             ...Non­applicants/Respondents.

    Coram
    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.

    Whether approved for reporting?1

    For the applicants :  Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, with
                          M/s Baldev Negi and Pushpinder Jaswal,
                          Additional Advocates General.


    For the respondents : None.
    Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)

The applicants/petitioners have sought review of the judgment passed by this Court, dated 20.06.2022 (Annexure R­1), in terms whereof, the Regular First Appeal filed by the review petitioners was dismissed on the ground that the same was not maintainable as the first appeal in fact had been filed against the judgment passed by learned Appellate Court under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code.

2. When the case was listed on 02.01.2023, the following order was passed:­ "Having gone through the grounds of the review 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

.

petition, all that this Court can observe is that it admires the audacity of the officer concerned who through this review petition is preaching to the Court that filing of a first appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure against a decision rendered by the learned District Judge in first appeal itself under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, was not a fault committed by the review petitioner but rather the onus was upon the High Court to have had converted the regular first appeal into regular second appeal. The submission on face of it is contemptuous. I leave it at that stage.

At this stage, on the request of learned Additional Advocate General, the case be ordered to be listed on 09.001.2023, with the observation that minimum of Rs. 2.00 Lac as cost is going to be imposed upon the applicant with further direction that this amount shall be recovered from concerned officer personally."

In compliance thereof, Dr. Amarjeet K. Sharma, Director, Higher Education, to the Govt. of H.P. present in person in the Court. He has expressed his regret over the language that has been used in the Review Petition.

3. In this view of the matter, the Court is not making any further comment on the issue save and except that the office of learned Advocate General has to be more careful and vigilant with ::: Downloaded on - 12/01/2023 20:31:56 :::CIS 3 .

regard to the language used in the pleadings. It is made clear that this Court is not questioning the right of the party concerned to file Review Petition, however, the party has to be careful with regard to the language used in the pleadings. In fact, the State being the largest litigant, certain level of decency is expected to be maintained in the pleadings.

4. Advocate General Be that as it may, at this stage, learned Additional submits that the applicants/petitioners be permitted to withdraw this application alongwith Review Petition as the revisional petitioners shall invoke their remedy by way of filing the Regular Second Appeal.

5. Present application is permitted to be withdrawn alongwith the Review Petition, so also the pending miscellaneous applications, if any.

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge January 11, 2023 (Rishi) ::: Downloaded on - 12/01/2023 20:31:56 :::CIS