AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
@JUDGMENT-JUDGMENT
The Court : G.A. No. 1079 of 2020 is an application for restoration of the writ petition no. 1160 of 2010 which was dismissed for default on December 19, 2019. The petitioners have also made a prayer for condonation of delay in filing this application. Reasons for the delay and explanation are to that effectcontained in paragraphs 15 and 16 of this application. It is submitted that as the matter was appearing in the warning list towards the end of 2019, the learned advocate engaged for the writ petition inadvertently missed the list and did not appear when the matter was taken up by another co-ordinate Bench of this Court and dismissed for default on December 19, 2019.
Having perused the reasons for delay as also the reasons as to why the writ petition was not attended to, I am inclined to allow the application condoning the delay in filing the same. Let the order dated December 19, 2019 be recalled and the writ petition be restored to its original file and number.
The writ petitioners have also prayed for restoration of the interim order passed on September 8, 2010. The order dated September 8, 2010 is a reasoned one and prima facie the Court was of the view that the petitioners had made out a good case for an interim relief. It was recorded that the Government had given a clear representation that none of the provisions of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation), Act, 1976 or rules framed thereunder would be applicable to National Textile Corporation. Thereafter, the Government tried to invoke the provisions of the Urban Land Ceiling Act and this Court had restrained the Government for doing so.
It is submitted by the learned advocate for the State respondents that circumstances may, have changed and instructions were required. However, this is a matter of 2010 and it is expected that the learned advocates should have been ready with the instructions.
It is submitted that the construction has already completed and as such, I do not find any reason not to protect the premises from any further interference by the Government. A further interim order is also granted restraining the authority from taking any step in furtherance to the final statement dated August 17, 2010.
In the absence of any information with regard to any changed circumstances, I do not find any reason as to why the interim order should not be restored. It is also put on record that even the respondents were not appearing before the Court when the writ petition was dismissed for default.