Narendra Singh Khichi Son Of Late ... vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 4452 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

               D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 551/2022
                                          In
               S.B. Civil Misc. Application No.139/2019
                                          In
                 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8106/2009
Narendra Singh Khichi Son Of Late Shri Ram Singh Khichi, Aged
About 84 Years, Resident Of Plot No. 14, Ganesh Colony, Near
Imliwala Phatak, Jaipur (Raj.)
                                                                     ----Appellant
                                      Versus
1.     State      Of      Rajasthan,           Through         Secretary,   Urban
       Department, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2.     The Chief Executive Officer, Nagar Nigam Tonk Road,
       Jaipur.
3.     The Commissioner, Jaipur Nagar Nigam Tonk Road, Jaipur.
4.     The Commissioner, Jaipur Development Authority, Jaipur.
5.     Shri Vijay Kumar Sharma @ Mamaji Builder, R/o 129-130,
       Janakpuri, Near Imliwala Phatak, Jaipur.
6.     Senior Divisional Engineer, H.q., North Western Railway,
       Zone Jaipur.
7.     Smt. Deepa Vijay Wife Of Ashok Vijay, Resident Of Plot
       No. 9, Ganesh Colony, Near Imliwala Phatak, Jaipur.
8.     Shri Ashok Vijay Son Of Shri Prayagraj Vijay, Resident Of
       Plot No. 9, Ganesh Colony, Near Imliwala Phatak, Jaipur.
9.     Chandra Mohan Bhati Son Of Shri Gendi Lal Bhati, R/o
       Plot No. M-1-A, Bhati Bhawan Mahesh Colony, Tonk
       Phatak, Jaipur
10.    Anandi Devi Wife Of Ganpat Lal, R/o Plot No. B-44, Natraj
       Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur (Raj.)
11.    Smt. Sayar Devi Wife Of Ram Chandra Gurjar, Resident Of
       Telipada, Bapu Bazar, Jaipur, Presently Resident Of Plot
       No.1, Ganesh Colony, Near Natraj Nagar, Rampura Roopa,
       Jaipur (Raj.)
12.    Smt. Prem Devi Wife Of Kailash Chand Gurjar, Resident Of
       Telipada, Bapu Bazar, Jaipur, Presently Resident Of Plot
       No.2, (Present Plot No.11), Ganesh Colony, Near Natraj
       Nagar, Rampura Roopa, Jaipur (Raj.)


                       (Downloaded on 06/07/2022 at 09:38:12 PM)
                                          (2 of 3)                  [SAW-551/2022]


13.     Ramdas Agarwal, Resident Of Plot No. 62 Natraj Nagar,
        Imliwala Phatak Road, Jaipur, Present R/o Plot No. 12
        (Old-1), Ganesh Colony, Imliwala Phatak, Jaipur (Raj.)
                                                                ----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Devendra Raghav Advocate with Mr. Adhiraj Singh Rajawat Advocate.

For Respondent No.8 : Mr. M.L. Sharma Advocate

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA Judgment / Order 04/07/2022

Heard.

This appeal arises out of an order dated 23.03.2022 passed

by the learned Single Judge, whereby its earlier order which was

passed on 19.05.2017 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8106/2009

along with S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14948/2009 has been

recalled and those writ petitions have been revived and restored

to their original numbers for hearing.

Learned counsel for the appellant would argue that the order

in original was passed on 19.05.2017 in two writ petitions and the

parties in those cases were heard. Any grievance later on

ventilated before the Court by filing a separate application by

some persons that they were not heard as they were not even

parties before the Court, but the order adversely affect their rights

and interests, could not have been made a basis to recall the

entire order, which was passed earlier on the basis of consent of

the parties, but at the most the order could be modified.

We find that two Writ Petitions No. 8106/2009 & 14948/2009

were listed before the Court for hearing on 19.05.2017. The order

does not refer to any of the respondents of S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.14948/2009.

(3 of 3) [SAW-551/2022]

The order appears to have been recalled by learned Single

Judge exercising discretion, taking into consideration that the

order had a very wide ranging effect so much so that it would be

effecting the rights of many other persons including those who

had moved application for recall on which basis the impugned

order has been passed.

The reason which has been assigned by the learned Single

Judge, in our opinion, is sound and does not warrant any

interference because number of parties were not heard and the

order had a very wide and far reaching effect on interest of many

persons including those who moved an application for recall of the

order.

The appeal has no merit and is, therefore, dismissed.

(SHUBHA MEHTA),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),J

Sanjay Kumawat-7

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)