Court No. - 55
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 765 of 2019 Appellant :- Raj Kumar Gupta Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Hausihla Prasad Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Vinod Kumar Chandel
Hon'ble Vikram Nath,J. Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
C.M. Delay Condonation Application No.01 of 2019.
There is a delay of 336 days in filing the appeal. This application has been filed to condone the delay.
Cause shown for the delay has been satisfactorily explained.
There is no objection from the side of the respondents.
Delay condonation application is allowed and the delay is condoned.
Office is directed to allot regular number in the appeal.
Order on Appeal
Heard Sri Hausihla Prasad Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Rajeev Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Sri V.K. Chandel, learned counsel representing respondent nos.5 & 7.
The present appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 16.08.2018 whereby the Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition on the following grounds:
"However, I have gone through the pleadings, grounds as also reliefs sought and find that petitioner is not able to make out a case so as to justify interference of this Court by granting reliefs, as prayed for.
Moreover, it appears that either the cause of action no more survives or the petitioner has lost interest in this matter or it has otherwise become infructuous and, probably for this reason, none is interested to have decided this matter on merits and that is why, counsel for petitioner is absent.
Dismissed. Interim order, if any, stands vacated."
Learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon a judgement of this Court in Special Appeal (Defective) No. 248 of 2018 (Sudha Singh vs. District Inspector of Schools And Ors.), decided on 28.8.2018, to argue that in similar circumstances, the appeal was allowed in the said matter. The Division Bench of this Court had allowed the appeal recording the following observations:
"From perusal of the order impugned, it is apparent that learned single Bench arrived at the conclusion that no case is made out for interference without assigning any reasons. It is well settled that while disposing of a petition for writ after its adjudication on merits, the writ Court is required to give reasons in support of its findings. No such reasons in the instant matter are given. The order impugned as such is apparently bad.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The order dated 1st February, 2018 is set aside. The petition for writ is remanded to the learned single Bench for its adjudication afresh. The interim direction / order vacated under the order dated January 1st, 2018 is also restored."
In view of the submissions made and on perusal of the order impugned, it is clear that the writ petition was dismissed without recording any reasons as such following the judgement in Special Appeal (Defective) No. 248 of 2018, the present appeal is also allowed. The judgement and order dated 16.08.2018 is set aside and the petition is remitted to the learned Single Judge for adjudication afresh.
Learned Single Judge is requested to make an endeavour to decide the writ petition as early as possible.
Order Date :- 22.8.2019 Ashutosh [Pankaj Bhatia, J.] [Vikram Nath, J.]