Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur

Rajesh Kumar Peeploda S/O Shri Ram Sahay ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 26 November, 2020

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                     BENCH AT JAIPUR

                 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8329/2020

Rajesh Kumar Peeploda S/o Shri Ram Sahay Jat
                                                                     ----Petitioner
                                     Versus
State Of Rajasthan
                                                                  ----Respondent

Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8330/2020 Kavita Godara D/o Mahaveer Prasad Godara

----Petitioner Versus The State Of Rajasthan

----Respondent S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10716/2020 Surendra S/o Harnam Singh

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.N. Mathur, Senior Advocate with Mr. Shovit Jhajharia Mr. Virendra Lodha, Senior Advocate with Mr. Atishay Jain Mr. Vigyan Shah For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Raghav, AAG Mr. M.F. Baig HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA Order 26/11/2020 The matter comes up on an application for recalling of the order dated 19.11.2020, so far as imposition of cost of Rs.25,000/- is concerned on the Officer Incharge for not filing reply.

(Downloaded on 02/12/2020 at 09:08:38 PM)
                                                            (2 of 2)                                     [CW-8329/2020]



                                         Learned   Additional     Advocate         General         submits   that   his

colleague did not have correct information relating to the case and erroneously mentioned that Officer Incharge has not submitted factual report. In fact, factual report had been received. Learned AAG submits that reply had also been drafted but he was not satisfied with the factual report and therefore, had directed for getting a fresh factual report in this regard.

Keeping in view the aforesaid circumstances, I am satisfied that the order passed by this court on 19.11.2020 deserves to be recalled so far as imposition of cost of Rs.25,000/- is concerned. It is also noticed that reply has also been filed and therefore, Registry is directed to place the same on record. The imposition of cost of Rs.25,000/- is waived in the present case.

The application for recalling of the order dated 19.11.2020 is accordingly disposed of.

List these cases again on 3.12.2020.

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J Ashu/ 228-230 (Downloaded on 02/12/2020 at 09:08:38 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)