Sahkari Vipran Sanstha Maryadit vs Smt. Geeta Yadav
2021 Latest Caselaw 1419 MP

                                                                      1                                  WA-27-2021
                                           The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                       WA-27-2021
                                            (SAHKARI VIPRAN SANSTHA MARYADIT Vs SMT. GEETA YADAV AND OTHERS)

                                 3
                                 Jabalpur, Dated : 08-04-2021
                                          None for the appellant.
                                          Shri B.S.Sahu, learned counsel for the respondent no.1.

Shri Ankit Agrawal, learned Government Advocate for the respondent- State.

Heard.

This Writ Appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 16/12/2020 passed in Writ Petition No 18126/2020 by which writ petition filed by the respondent No.1 was allowed and the appellant herein was directed to pay the amount to the respondent/writ petitioner within a period of 30 days. It was further directed that if such payment was not made within the period of 30 days, the respondent/writ petitioner would be entitled to get interest over the said amount.

The appellant/Sanstha herein which was the respondent No.5 in the writ petition has challenged the order by filing a writ appeal by contending that the

writ petition was disposed of by the learned Single Judge even without issuing notice to the appellant and an ex parte order has been passed. Several facts have been concealed by the respondent/writ petitioner from the Court and that the liability has been fastened upon the appellant without hearing it. It is contended that as per the audit report, it has been revealed that several financial irregularities have been committed by the employees of the appellant during the period 2016-18 and in certain instances double payment has been made to 158 agriculturists causing a huge loss of more than Rs.1.5 Crore to the appellant/Sanstha.

Even though the learned counsel for the respondent No.1 has opposed the appeal by contending that in another writ petition bearing Writ Petition Signature Not Verified SAN No.18120/2020, similar order or interlocutory order, has been passed after

Digitally signed by SMT SUSHMA KUSHWAHA Date: 2021.04.09 12:55:51 IST 2 WA-27-2021 hearing the appellant and that writ petition is still pending, but considering that in the present case final order was passed without even issuing any notice to the appellant, we deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned judgment and revive the writ petition and remit the matter to the Single Bench.

The said writ petition be heard along with Writ Petition No.18120/2020 on the date fixed in that matter.

Accordingly, the writ appeal stands disposed of.

                                        (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)                                    (SANJAY DWIVEDI)
                                         CHIEF JUSTICE                                              JUDGE


                                 S /-




Signature Not Verified
  SAN




Digitally signed by SMT SUSHMA
KUSHWAHA
Date: 2021.04.09 12:55:51 IST