Court No. - 9
Case :- WRIT - B No. - 3 of 2019 Petitioner :- Shankar Respondent :- Deputy Director Of Consolidation And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dhananjay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
The matter has been adjourned on the previous eight occasions in the absence of counsel for the petitioner.
The instant writ petition is directed against an order dated 06.10.2018 rejecting a recall/restoration application filed by the petitioner.
The facts of the case are that the petitioner filed a revision. This revision was allowed.
Against the order allowing the revision, respondent no. 3, Munni Lal filed a restoration application. On this restoration application, notice was served upon the petitioner and, thereafter, the restoration application of Munni Lal was allowed and the revision was restored to its original number.
The revision was therefore dismissed for default vide order dated 14.08.1994. The application for recalling the same was filed on 07.04.2015. 21 years after the revision had been dismissed for want of prosecution. This restoration application has been dismissed by the order dated 06.10.2018.
The revision was filed by the petitioner and the order allowing the revision passed in the year 1992 had been recalled in the year 1994, after due intimation to the petitioner. The revision was dismissed for want of prosecution and for 21 years thereafter, no action was taken by the petitioner.
Looking into this conduct of the petitioner, the restoration application has been rejected by the impugned order, which order in my considered opinion, is perfectly justified.
Accordingly, the writ petition is found to be without merit and is dismissed.
Order Date :- 25.2.2019 Mayank