Court No. - 29
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 180 of 2019 Appellant :- Balmik Pratap Dwivedi Respondent :- District Basic Education Officer And 3 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Grijesh Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pranesh Dutt Tripathi,Vijay Kumar
Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J. Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
The appeal is beyond time by 144 days.
The delay is sufficiently explained in the affidavit.
Accordingly, we are satisfied with the explanation and condone the delay in filing the appeal.
Delay condonation application no.1 of 2019 is allowed.
Heard Sri Grijesh Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner-appellant, Sri Vijay Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent no.4 and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
The writ petition of the petitioner-appellant was dismissed by the writ court vide judgement and order dated 03.08.2018 holding that a reading of the averments made in the petition do not make out a case to justify interference by the writ court and for granting reliefs as prayed therein. It has also been observed that the cause of action may not be surviving and therefore, the petition probably has become infructuous.
Learned counsel for the petitioner-appellant submits that the writ petition had not become infructuous as it relates to the matter of appointment of the petitioner-appellant. Moreover, the petition was decided in the absence of the counsel for the petitioner-appellant by a non-speaking order.
A similar order dismissing the writ petition came up for consideration before another Division Bench presided over by the Hon'ble Chief Justice in Special Appeal Defective No.248 of 2018, Sudha Singh Vs. District Inspector of Schools and Others.
The Division Bench on the perusal of the impugned order passed by the writ court held that it is apparent that the petition has been dismissed without assigning reasons which is against the well settled principle that while disposing a petition on merits, the Court ought to assign reasons in support of its finding. Since no reasons were assigned in dismissing the petition, the order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the writ court for decision afresh.
Same is the position in the present case also. The writ court has dismissed the petition without assigning any reasons by casually observing that a reading of the pleadings makes out no case for interference and for grant of any relief.
In view of above, the order dismissing the writ petition is a non-speaking order which cannot be sustained in law.
Accordingly, the order dated 03.08.2018 is set aside and the writ petition and the interim order, if any, is restored to its original number for decision afresh on merits.
The Special Appeal is allowed.
Order Date :- 22.2.2019 Abhilash