Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
State Of Raj And Ors vs Om Prakash Chhipa on 26 May, 2017
Author: Chief Justice
Bench: Chief Justice
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT
JAIPUR
(1) D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1019 / 2016
1. State of Rajasthan Through Its Principal Education Secretary,
Department of Education,, Government Secretariat, Jaipur,
Rajasthan.
2. The Director, Elementary Education,, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. The District Education Officer (Elementary),, Bhilwara.
----Appellants
Versus
Om Prakash Chhipa S/o Shankar Lal Chhipa,, Aged About 43
Years, Bundi Mohallan, Shahpura, District Bhilwara
----Respondent
Connected with (2) D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1014 / 2016
1. State of Rajasthan Through Its Principal Education Secretary, Department of Education,, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. The Director, Elementary Education,, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. The District Education Officer (Elementary),, Bhilwara.
----Appellants Versus Krishan Gopal Vaishnav S/o Siya Ram Vaishnav, aged about 46 years, R/o Village & Post Danthal, Via Suwana, District Bhilwara
----Respondent Connected With (3) D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1015 / 2016
1. State of Rajasthan Through Its Principal Secretary, Department of Education,, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. The Director, Elementary Education,, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. The District Education Officer (Elementary),, Bhilwara.
----Appellants (2 of 4) [SAW-1019/2016] Versus
1. Panna Ram Gurjar S/o Harsahai Gurjar, aged about 46 years, R/o Village Palsana, Post Pratapgarh, Tehsil Thanagazi, District Alwar.
2. Mahipal Singh Solanky S/o Kalyan Singh Solanky, aged about 34 years, R/o Village & Post Jaleendi, Tehsil Bijoliya, District Bhilwara.
3. Ounkar Lal Mali S/o Panna Lal Mali, aged about 34 years, R/o Mali Khera, Post Kotri, District Bhilwara.
4. Shankar Lal Kalwar s/o Dharmi Chand Kalwar, aged about 38 years, R/o Village & Post Sambhugarh, Tehsil Asind, District Bhilwara.
5. Arun Kumar Jaiswal S/o Baleshwar Prasad, aged about 38 years, R/o Village & Post Shambhugarh, Tehsil Asind, District Bhilwara.
6. Kadir Mohammed s/o Latif Mohammed, aged about 43 years, R/o Street No.3, Gulpar Nagar, Bhilwara.
7. Friyad Ali Mansuri s/o Abdul Mazid Mansury, aged about 32 years, R/o Mehta Mohalla, Tehsil Bhinai, District Ajmer.
8. Mohammed Hussain Pathan S/o Rahim Baksh, aged about 36 years, R/o Beawar Road, Chungi Naka, Asind, District Bhilwara.
9. Bhagirath Lal Gurjar s/o Nahru Lal Gurjar, aged about 38 years, R/o Village & Post Jagpura Sagrev, Tehsil Raipur, District Bhilwara.
10. Panna Lal Kumawat s/o Kalyan Mal Kumawat, aged about 38 years, R/o Jitendra Kumar Khatwani, A-65, Shastri Nagar, Bhilwara.
11. Ram Swaroop Kumawat s/o Madhu Kumawat, aged about 34 years, R/o Village & Post Kohiyan, Tehsil Shahpura, District Bhilwara
12. Hari Shankar Jat s/o Kishan Lal Jat, aged about 34 years, R/o Sarovar Marg, Village & Post Kotri, District Bhilwara
----Respondents _____________________________________________________ For Appellant(s) : Mr. S.K. Gupta, AAG with Mr. Y.S. Jadoun For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.N. Kumawat, Mr. Ram Pratap Saini _____________________________________________________ HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA (3 of 4) [SAW-1019/2016] Order 26/05/2017 In D.B. Civil Misc. Application No.640/2016 in DBSAW No.1019/2016:
For the reasons mentioned in the application, delay in filing the appeal is condoned. The application is allowed. In D.B. Civil Special Appeal(W) Nos.1019/2016, 1014/2016 & 1015/2016:
1. As learned counsel for the appellants proceeded to argue the matters, Counsel fairly conceded that the facts on which the appeals are sought to be argued were not brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge and therefore prays for leave to be granted permission to withdraw the writ-appeals so that the appellants can exercise the right of review before the learned Single Judge.
2. The writ-appeals are dismissed. If the appellants exercise the right of review, the learned Single Judge shall decide the application seeking review as per the review jurisdiction of the Court and as regards the delay in seeking review, the learned Single Judge would keep into account the fact that the above captioned writ-appeals were filed in this Court and two of them were admitted and listed for hearing today. One writ-appeal has been listed for 'orders' today.
3. All the writ-appeals are disposed of today by being permitted to be withdrawn.
(4 of 4) [SAW-1019/2016]
4. No costs.
(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA)J. (PRADEEP NANDRAJOG),C.J.
KKC/1, 70, 71