AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
D.S. Sinha, J.—The first contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that no counter affidavit having been filed by the standing counsel, as directed by this court on 10-6-1987, this petition is bound to be admitted. This contention of the petitioner is totally misconceived. The petition has to stand on its own legs. Mere failure on the part of the other side in filing the counter affidavit is no ground for admission of a writ petition. The second ground urged is that the order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 14-5-1987 does not give any reason and, therefore, it is bad. This ground also is not sustainable. From the perusal of the order itself it transpired that reasons for the dismissal of the application are contained in the order. Nothing else has been pointed out by the learned counsel to show that impugned orders suffer from any such infirmity which may warrant interference by this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India The petition is devoid of substance and is, therefore, dismissed summarily.