Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

KALYAN SAHAI CHOUDHARY versus STATE OF RAJ & ORS

High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


KALYAN SAHAI CHOUDHARY v STATE OF RAJ & ORS - CW Case No. 2899 of 2003 [2007] RD-RJ 2112 (19 April 2007)

CW 2899/03

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

AT JAIPUR BENCH

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2899/03

Kalyan Sahai Choudhary Versus State & Ors.

DATE OF ORDER :: 19/04/2007

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI

Mr. Sudesh Bansal, for petitioner

Mr. B.K. Sharma, Dy.G.A.

***

Instant petition has been filed assailing the order dated 18th February, 2003 [Ann.4] passed by the District Collector, Dausa.

Respondents in their reply have raised objection apart from merits that the present writ petition is not maintainable since the order impugned is appealable one u/s.75 of the Act before the Revenue Appellate Authority and once the statutory efficacious remedy is available to petitioner, this court will not like to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Counsel for petitioner submits that he has assailed the order of District Collector on the premise that it is per se bad and contrary to the provisions of the Act. As such, despite availability of alternative remedy of appeal, he has approached this court and the matter remained pending for almost 4 years by now. Even he has now been asked to avail remedy of appeal,

CW 2899/03 certainly which is barred by limitation since 30 days time is available for filing appeal.

It appears from the record that instant 23rd petition was preferred by petitioner on

April, 2003 and notices were issued on 28th May, 2003. It will certainly cause injustice to petitioner if he is not being provided right of appeal which is available to him under statute.

The writ petition stands dismissed. However, it is made clear that if appeal is preferred by petitioner within 30 days, the authority may treat it to be under limitation and examine his grievance on merits. [AJAY RASTOGI],J.

FRBOHRA,JR.P.A.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.