Union Of India vs Raghuvir Singh Dhaka
2021 Latest Caselaw 9074 Raj

HIGH COURT of JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 59/2019

1. Union of India through the Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Communication, Department of Posts, Dak Tar Bhawan, New Delhi

2. The Chief Postmaster General, Rajasthan Circle, Jaipur.

3. The Director, O/o The Post Master General Western Region, Jodhpur.

4. Superintendent of Posts offices, Churu Division Churu.

5. Senior Superintendent of Posts offices, Ajmer Division, Ajmer.

----Petitioners Versus Raghuvir Singh Dhaka S/o Late Shri Shivpal Singh Dhaka, Aged About 48 Years, By Caste Jat, R/o Ward No. 42 Sujangarh District Churu. (Presently working as Sub Postmaster at Salasar Post Office Churu Division).

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pushan Rastogi on behalf of Mr. B.P. Bohra.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR VYAS

Order

08/04/2021

This review petition is filed by the review-petitioners seeking

review of order dated 08.08.2017 passed by a Coordinate Bench

of this Court, whereby writ petition preferred by the respondent

herein, was allowed.

The review petition is reported to be barred by limitation for

602 days. It is accompanied by an application under Section 5 of

the Limitation Act.

(2 of 2) [WRW-59/2019]

Precisely, the reasons assigned for condonation of delay is

that the matter was examined at different levels in the office of

review petitioners and then decision was taken to file review

petition and the delay has been caused on account of procedures

adopted at different level by the Government.

A perusal of the review petition reveals that after the

judgment being pronounced by this Court, the matter for taking

decision for further appeal or review was processed by the review-

petitioners in most casual manner.

Suffice it to say that the explanation furnished for inordinate

delay of 602 days is not plausible and acceptable and in no

manner constitutes a sufficient cause for condoning inordinate

delay of 602 days and, therefore, application under Section 5 of

the Limitation Act deserves to be dismissed and consequently, the

review petition deserves to be dismissed as barred by time.

However, in the interest of justice, we have perused the

review petition as well.

As a matter of fact, by way of this petition, the review-

petitioner wants this Court to re-hear the matter on fresh

grounds, which cannot be permitted.

Accordingly, the application under Section 5 of the Limitation

Act is dismissed.

Consequently, the review petition is dismissed as barred by

limitation.

(RAMESHWAR VYAS),J (SANGEET LODHA),J

11-DJ/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)