WPMS/3094/2023
2025 Latest Caselaw 2386 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

WPMS/3094/2023 on 18 March, 2025

Author: Pankaj Purohit

Bench: Pankaj Purohit

                      Of f ice N ot e s,
                    re port s, or de rs
                    or proce e din gs
SL. N o.   Da t e     or dire ct ion s                                    COURT'S OR JU DGE'S ORDERS
                    a n d Re gist ra r's
                        orde r w it h
                       Sign a t u re s


                                           WPMS No.3093 of 2023
                                           And
                                           WPMS No.3094 of 2023
                                           Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.

Ms. Sukhbani Singh, learned counsel i/b Mr. Parikshit Saini, present for learned counsel for the applicants/ petitioners.

2. Mr. Navin Chandra Tiwari, learned B.H. present for the State.

3. Mr. Raunak Pant, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Naresh Pant, present for the NHAI.

3. Heard.

4. Application (MCC/2/2024) has been moved on behalf of respondent-NHAI whereas application MCC/3/2024) has been moved by petitioner in WPMS No.3093 of 2093. Similarly, in WPMS No.3094 of 2023, Recall (MCC/2/2024) is moved by respondent-NHAI and another review application (MCC/3/2025) is moved on behalf of petitioner. The prayer made in these applications by the applicants is to allow the same and recall/review the order dated 04.11.2024 passed by this Court in afore- numbered petitions and batch.

5. The ground taken in these review/recall applications is that these petitions were wrongly listed with the bunch of writ petitions (WPMS No.2675 of 2023) and others which were decided together on 04.11.2024 conjointly.

6. In the opinion of this Court, the ground, so taken by review applicants, is at all not maintainable since when the petitions were decided both the Counsels of review/ recall applicants, namely, Mr. Parikshit Saini and Mr. Naresh Pant were present and only in their presence, the order was passed.

7. Now, raising such a ground at such a belated stage cannot be permitted. In the opinion of this Court, there is no ground to recall/review the aforesaid judgment dated 04.11.2024 passed by this Court in above-numbered petitions. As a result, all the review/recall applications fail and the same are dismissed.

\

(Pankaj Purohit, J.) 18.03.2025 R.Dang