Hon'ble Mahendra Dayal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
This special appeal arises out of the judgment and order dated 29.10.2002 passed in Writ Petition No. 4857 (SS) of 1998, whereby learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition inter alia on the grounds that respondent no.1/petitioner was validly appointed and since he has been continuing on his post from the date of his joining.
Counsel for the appellants submits that while adjudicating and passing the impugned judgment and order dated 29.10.2002, learned Single Judge has not considered the submissions advanced on behalf the appellants.
On perusal of the impugned order, it reflects that while passing the impugned order, learned Single Judge noted down the submission made on behalf of the appellants. Even otherwise, if the submissions or any arguments had not been dealt with by the Court concerned, it is open for the parties to approach appropriate Court.
Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that there is no illegality and infirmity in the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge.
The special appeal is dismissed.
Order Date :- 17.9.2014 Muk