AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
I.A. No. 13601/2011 seeking condonation of delay in filing this review petition u/s 5 of the Limitation Act.
There is delay of 345 days in filing this application. The prayer made in the application is not opposed by Shri Kumaresh Pathak, hence the application is allowed. Delay in filing this review petition is condoned.
With the consent of parties, heard the matter on merits.
The facts of the case are that Late G.S. Pardesi filed an original application before the M.P. State Administrative Tribunal, Bench at Bhopal, appears to be in the year 2000. After abolition of the Tribunal, the matter was transmitted to the High Court of Madhya Pradesh and the original application after transmission was registered as W.P.No.24471/2003. The aforesaid matter came up for hearing on 20.10.2010. On the aforesaid date, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner G.S. Pardesi and the learned Single Judge of this Court (now demitted the office) decided the matter and dismissed the petition merely on the ground that K.C. Nagar, who was junior to G.S. Pardesi was not impleaded as party and in the petition, petitioner claimed seniority on and above K.C. Nagar. Relying on the two judgments of Apex Court in Rajbir Singh, HFS-II Vs. State of Haryana and Another, and V.P. Shrivastava and Others Vs. State of M.P. and Others, the writ petition itself was dismissed on the ground of non-impleadment of necessary party.
Learned counsel for petitioner submitted as under :-
That G.S. Pardesi has died and his claim for promotion on the post of ACF, his seniority and monetary benefits is now relevant M.C.C.No.1624/2011 only for the purpose of monetary benefits.
That on the date when the original application was filed before the M.P. State Administrative Tribunal, Bhopal G.S. Pardesi was 59 years old and after one year of filing of original application, he had attained the age of superannuation. In these circumstances, even on the date i.e. 20.10.2010 when the writ petition was decided, he was entitled for notional promotion and monetary benefits, so the defect of non-impleadment of K.C. Nagar was not fatal, because of which the writ petition could have been dismissed. It is submitted by Smt. Patel that in the case counsel from Bhopal was appearing, who subsequently engaged Shri Manikant Sharma, who could not appear on the date of hearing, resulting in dismissal of the case. It is submitted by Smt. Patel that the matter may be heard on merits, so that even after the death of G.S. Pardesi, his legal representatives may get benefits of the lis.
From the perusal of order passed by the learned Single Judge, we find that the matter was not considered on merits, but the writ petition was dismissed merely on the ground that K.C. Nagar, who was junior to G.S. Pardesi was not impleaded as party. In absence of necessary party the writ petition was dismissed, but the fact remains that on the date when the writ petition was decided G.S. Pardesi had also attained age of superannuation and in fact there was no question of grant of actual seniority on and above K.C. Nagar. G.S. Pardesi was entitled for notional seniority and monetary benefits. In these circumstances, the dismissal of writ petition has caused serious prejudice to the interest of G.S. Pardesi. There is apparently an error on the face of the record, which deserves to be rectified by this Court. In view of aforesaid, we find it appropriate to recall the order dated 20.10.2010 passed in W.P.No.24471/2003 and accordingly the aforesaid order is recalled. Now the matter be placed before the appropriate Bench for consideration.
Smt. Gulab Patel, learned counsel for petitioners - legal representatives of G.S. Pardesi undertakes to file fresh power on behalf of legal representatives in W.P.No.24471/2003 along with the application for substitution of legal representatives of G.S. Pardesi, within a period of four weeks from today.
This M.C.C., stands finally disposed of, with no order as to costs.
C.C., as per rules.