Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Union Of India vs Raghuvir Singh Dhaka on 8 April, 2021
Bench: Sangeet Lodha, Rameshwar Vyas
HIGH COURT of JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
D.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 173/2019
1. Union of India through the Secretary, Government of
India, Ministry of Communication, Department of Posts,
Dar Tar Bhawan, New Delhi.
2. The Chief Postmaster General, Rajasthan Circle, Jaipur.
3. The Director, O/o The Post Master General Western
Region, Jodhpur.
4. Superintendent of Posts Offices, Churu Division Churu.
5. Senior Superintendent of Posts offices, Ajmer Division
Ajmer.
----Petitioners
Versus
Raghuvir Singh Dhaka S/o Late Shri Shivpal Singh Dhaka, aged
about 48 Years, By Caste Jat R/o Ward No 42 Sujangarh District
Churu. (Presently working as Sub Postmaster at Salasar Post
Office Churu Division.)
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pushan Rastogi on behalf of
Mr. B.P. Bohra.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR VYAS Order 08/04/2021 This review petition is filed by the review-petitioners seeking review of order dated 08.08.2017 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, whereby writ petition preferred by the respondent herein, was allowed.
The review petition is reported to be barred by limitation for 602 days. It is accompanied by an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
(Downloaded on 08/04/2021 at 09:09:40 PM)
(2 of 2) [WRW-173/2019] Precisely, the reasons assigned for condonation of delay is that the matter was examined at different levels in the office of review petitioners and then decision was taken to file review petition and the delay has been caused on account of procedures adopted at different level by the Government.
A perusal of the review petition reveals that after the judgment being pronounced by this Court, the matter for taking decision for further appeal or review was processed by the review- petitioners in most casual manner.
Suffice it to say that the explanation furnished for inordinate delay of 602 days is not plausible and acceptable and in no manner constitutes a sufficient cause for condoning inordinate delay of 602 days and, therefore, application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act deserves to be dismissed and consequently, the review petition deserves to be dismissed as barred by time.
However, in the interest of justice, we have perused the review petition as well.
As a matter of fact, by way of this petition, the review- petitioner wants this Court to re-hear the matter on fresh grounds, which cannot be permitted.
Accordingly, the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is dismissed.
Consequently, the review petition is dismissed as barred by limitation.
(RAMESHWAR VYAS),J (SANGEET LODHA),J 13-DJ/-
(Downloaded on 08/04/2021 at 09:09:40 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)