Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited vs Ut Of Jk And Ors on 14 February, 2022
Author: Ali Mohammad Magrey
Bench: Ali Mohammad Magrey
Serial No. 51
Supplementary cause list
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT
SRINAGAR
CM No. 539/2022 in
LPA No. 15/2022
CM No. 540/2022
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited
..... Petitioner(s)
Through: -
Mr. Faisal Qadri, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Altaf Mehraj, Advocate
V/s
UT of JK and Ors.
..... Respondent(s)
Through: -
Mr. Irfan Andleeb, Dy. AG Mr. J. A. Kawoosa, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Areeb Kawoosa, Advocate Mr. T. M. Shamsi, ASGI Mr. Z. A. Shah, Sr. Advocate with Mr. A. Hanan, Advocate for intervenor CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey, Judge Hon'ble Mr Justice Mohd Akram Chowdhary, Judge (ORDER) 14.02.2022 LPA No. 15/2022 The instant Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order dated 07.02.2022, passed in WP(C) No. 150/2022, CM No. 342/2022 by the learned Single Judge, in terms whereof the further consideration of the writ petition has been deferred till next date, as the learned Single Judge sought listing of the case along with similar cases, details whereof were sought from the Government counsel to be supplied to the Registry of this Court.
Brief facts of the case.
The appellant-writ petitioner has filed writ petition bearing WP(C) No. 150/2022, along with CM No. 342/2022, before the writ Court and sought consideration for grant of interim relief in relation to uninterrupted manufacture, sale and supply of their product namely "Mak All Seasons HMO", which has not been granted pending consideration of the other similar cases and as stated by learned counsel appearing for the appellant, has an impact on the appellant's financial position. It is stated that the appellant fulfils the three cardinal principles for grant of interim relief and the denial of the same has resulted in violation of the rights of the appellant, besides putting the appellant to irreparable loss, which cannot be compensated if not granted at this stage.
Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has discussed the merits of the case in the appeal, which is subject of the writ petition. We feel it unnecessary to detail out these facts in the present order, as we propose to dispose of the appeal by directing the writ Court to consider the grant or otherwise of the interim relief.
Mr. J. A. Kawoosa, learned senior counsel, submits that he has filed the caveat, but the same is not listed. It is submitted that the appeal is not maintainable, as no order has been passed by the writ Court and the consideration for grant or otherwise of the interim relief is still pending with the writ Court.
We are conscious of the fact that the writ petition of the appellant has remained pending without any orders.
Heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the records and considered the matter.
On consideration of the matter and after hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered view that the writ Court ought to have considered the writ petition for grant or otherwise of interim orders notwithstanding pendency of similar cases.
Admittedly, no order is passed in the writ petition or in interim application, which has been kept pending and directed to be listed along with similar cases.
Without making any observation and recording any finding on the merits of the case, we simply dispose of the appeal with request to learned Single Judge, to consider the writ petition along with interim application for grant or otherwise of the interim relief, notwithstanding pendency of the similar cases. The writ Court shall also consider the effect of the circulars impugned in the petition.
At this stage, Mr. Z. A. Shah, learned senior counsel enters appearance and intervenes with submission that the similarly situated persons have filed the writ petitions, challenging the actions of respondents similar in the writ petition of the appellant and only notices have been issued, therefore, the writ Court has rightly directed consideration of the writ petition along with those similar writ petitions. While considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered view that the writ Court shall consider the writ petition filed by the appellant which does not mean that other writ petitions are not to be considered but appellant seek consideration of writ petition on his own merit.
List the writ petition filed by the appellant on 17.02.2022 before learned Single Judge. We request the learned Single Judge to take up the matter on 17.02.2022 for consideration and pass appropriate orders.
Disposed of along with connected CM(s).
(Mohd Akram Chowdhary) (Ali Mohammad Magrey)
Judge Judge
SRINAGAR
MOHAMMAD YASIN DAR
14.02.2022
2022.02.15 10:47
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of "Mohammad Yasin Dar"
this document