(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.MAJMUDAR)
1. Both the appeals are ADMITTED. Learned AGP, Ms. Calla, waives service of notice of admission of appeals.
2. Since, the issue involved in both the appeals is common and a short one, with the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, same are taken up for final hearing, today.
3. The appellants, herein, have filed two petitions being Special Civil Application Nos. 4694 of 1998 and 4695 of 1998 before the learned Single Judge, which have been admitted long back and interim relief which was granted earlier was in operation at the time when the learned Single Judge dismissed the said Special Civil Applications for default. Subsequent thereto, Miscellaneous Civil Application Nos. 1419 and 1418 of 2012 were filed for restoration of the aforesaid writ-petitions. The learned Single Judge, after hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned AGP, allowed both the applications. The conduct of the learned Advocate for the petitioners, regarding not remaining present, has also been taken care in Paras-2 and 3 of the said order by the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge, though, restored both the petitions on the record, on payment of costs, as recorded in the earlier order dated 30.04.2012, he, however, did not restored the interim reliefs operating earlier in the petitions. It is the aforesaid order, which is impugned by the appellants by way of these Letters Patent Appeals.
4. Learned Counsel, Mr. Dave, for the appellants argued that once the writ-petitions were restored, the interim relief granted in the said writ-petitions automatically revived and there was no necessity to pass a separate orders vacating the same. It is, further, submitted that, once the learned Single Judge, himself, found that the appellants be given a chance and the matters be heard on merits, in the interest of justice, by restoring the petitions, the interim reliefs granted, therein, can be said to have been revived as soon as soon as the main petitions were restored to file. Mr. Dave, further, submitted that, since, in the instant case, the interim reliefs were granted in the main writ-petitions itself and not in separate civil applications, once the writ-petitions were restored, the interim relief also stood restored and therefore learned Single Judge could not have passed the impugned order refusing to restore the interim relief.
5. Learned AGP, Ms. Calla, on the other hand, argued that the learned Single Judge passed the aforesaid order keeping in mind the past conduct of the appellants, since the appellants were not vigilant in pursuing the matters by remaining present before the learned Single Judge.
6. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties. It is required to be noted that once a petition is restored to file, the interim reliefs passed therein also stands revived. It may also be noted that, earlier, applications for vacating the interim reliefs were filed, which were rejected by the learned Single Judge. It is true that the appellants should have remained vigilant and the learned Advocate for the appellants ought to have argued the matters before the learned Single Judge, since these are old cases. In a given case, after obtaining interim relief in a matter, learned Advocate may not remain present for a long time, in such a situation the Court may consider whether the interim relief deserves to be vacated or not. However, the learned Advocate for the appellants orally undertook that, if, one chance is given by restoring the interim relief, he would see to it that the proceedings are not delayed any further in any manner. It is true that as argued by the learned Counsel for the appellant that, though, in a given case, the learned Advocate may be negligent, the ultimate sufferer would be the litigant and the cause of the litigant should not suffer only on that count. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it proper to restore the interim reliefs which were in operation in Special Civil Applications for more than a decade.
7. The learned Counsel for the appellants, Mr. Dave, at this stage, has assured the Court by way of an oral undertaking that as and when the matter is listed for final hearing, he will see to it that the matters are not again dismissed for non-prosecution.
8. In view of the aforesaid oral assurance given by the learned Counsel for the appellants, Mr. Dave, both the appeals are ALLOWED and the learned Single Judge may, now, proceed with the main petitions on merits and may dispose of the same as early as possible, since, the same are old and the interim reliefs are operating, therein. Appeals are disposed of, accordingly.
9. The time to pay costs of Rs.3000/-, in each appeal, is extended upto 30TH JUNE, 2012.
If the costs, as stated above, are not paid by the said date, both the appeals shall stand dismissed. With the consent of both the sides, it is agreed that the costs be deposited by the appellants with the Registry of the High Court and on the same being deposited, it shall be withdrawn by the respondent-State Government, unconditionally.
10. Since, the appeals are disposed of civil applications shall not survive and they also stand DISPOSED OF, accordingly.
(P.B.
MAJMUDAR, J.) (MOHINDER PAL, J.) Umesh/ Top