✦ Jharkhand High Court

Trilochan Sharma v. The State of Jharkhand & Ors.

RANCHI. W.P(C) No. 523 of 2013P P BHATT

Case at a glance

Outcome

Disposed of

With the aforesaid observation and direction this writ petition stands disposed of

Provisions considered

Judgment

Operative part

CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.P.BHATT For the Petitioners :- Mr A.K.Sahani Adv. For the State-Respondents :- Mr. Vikash Kishsore Prasad Adv. 2/19.7.2013. The present petitioners by way of filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has prayed for quashing of the order dated 11.8.2012 passed by the respondent no.3 in case no. 398 of 2011(Annexure-1) declining to entertaining the objection raised by the petitioner under section 87 of the C.N.T Act. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the order dated 11.8.2012 was passed ex-parte without affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner preferred Review application (Annexure-2) but the respondent authority has not taken any decision on his review application. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the respondent no.3 to consider and take decision on the said review application. The learned counsel for the Respondent-State Government submitted that the order of annexure-1 came to be passed after several opportunities given to the petitioner but since the petitioner has remained absent, the concerned authority had no option but to proceed and pass an exparte order. It is further submitted that there is a provision to prefer an appeal against the order of annexure-1 and therefore, if the petitioner is aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said order, he is required to be directed to prefer an appeal. In view of the aforesaid rival submissions and more particularly in view of the fact that review application filed by the present petitioner is pending, the same is required to be dealt with and decided by the respondent no.3. Therefore, the present petition is required to be disposed of by directing the respondent no.3 to take decision on the review application (Annexure-2) within stipulated time. Accordingly, the respondent no.3 is directed to consider and take decision on the Review application(Annexure-2) within a period of three months. With the aforesaid observation and direction this writ petition stands disposed of. SD (P.P.Bhatt, J)

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: With the aforesaid observation and direction this writ petition stands disposed of

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Constitution of India — art. 226.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Jharkhand High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. RANCHI. W.P(C) No. 523 of 2013). ← Search more judgments