State Of Rajasthan vs Rafiq Mohammad S/O Late Shri Babu ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 355 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

              D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 35/2022

1.     State Of     Rajasthan, Through The                      Secretary, Excise
       (Finance)    Department,            Government             Of   Rajasthan,
       Secretariate, Jaipur
2.     Excise Commissioner, Excise Department, Udaipur
3.     District Excise Officer, Jaipur City, Vitt Bhawan, Janpath,
       Near Vidhan Sabha, Jaipur
                                                                    ----Appellants
                                   Versus
Rafiq Mohammad S/o Late Shri Babu Khan, Aged About 47
Years, Resident Of L-1/10, Sector No. 6, Jiwan Chaya, Lic Flat,
Vidyadhar Nagar, Jaipur.
                                                                  ----Respondent

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Vivek Dangi through VC For Respondent(s) :

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

Order

17/01/2022

D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 35/2022 & D.B. Civil Misc.

Application No.15/2022:-

This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned

Single Judge dated 03.08.2018 in writ petition No.12236/2012.

The respondent-original petitioner had sought refund of a sum of

Rs.3.80 lacs on the ground that in case of similarly situated

persons it was granted and also provided that the refund would be

given to other similarly situated persons. The learned Single Judge

allowed the writ petition directing the refund of money with

interest and imposed a cost of Rs.25,000/-. The interest and cost

(2 of 2) [SAW-35/2022]

to be recovered from the concerned District Excise Officer who

was required to release the amount on demand raised by the

petitioner.

There is a delay of more than 1145 days in filing this appeal.

We find no proper reasons for explaining such gross delay.

Importantly the facts recorded by the learned Single Judge are not

seriously disputed. Despite clear declaration by the Court in case

of another person that similarly situated person should receive

refund without litigation, the petitioner was not granted refund. He

filed a writ petition in the year 2012 which the Government

resisted instead of fairly conveying to the court that not granting

refund to him was an error. It appears that in some cases refund

was granted but the petitioner was treated differently.

We do not find any reason to condone the delay. In absence

of any worthwhile explanation for inordinate delay in filing the

appeal, the application for condonation of delay is dismissed.

Resultantly the appeal is also dismissed. All pending applications

stand disposed of.

                                   (SAMEER JAIN),J                                                     (AKIL KURESHI),CJ

                                   Kamlesh Kumar/N.Gandhi/24









Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)