AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S.C. Dharmadhikari, J.—The Notice of motion was before me alongwith the Writ Petition No.618 of 1997. It was stated before me that the Writ petition can be heard alongwith the notice of motion and that is how reliance was placed on an order passed by this Court. I proceeded on the basis that the notice of motion is before me and since the Writ Petition was also directed to be heard with the Notice of Motion, I can hear the arguments on both.
However, after the matter was fully heard, I brought it to the notice of the parties that the original side Rules have been amended and the Writ Petition must go before a Division Bench under the same. Therefore, both sides stated before me that they would apply for clarification so that I can hear and disposed off the writ petition as a Single Judge. I have invited attention of the parties to the order passed by this Court which suggests that the notice of motion should be heard alongwith the writ petition and not otherwise. Both sides sought time to take appropriate steps.
It appears that the petitioner in Writ petition moved the Hon''ble the Chief Justice by addressing a precipice through the Prothonotary and Senior Master. However, no orders have been obtained thereon. Considering the fact that the Rules do not permit the writ petition to be heard by Single Judge and the order is that the notice of motion should be heard alongwith the writ petition, I cannot proceed to hear this matter. Office to take steps to place this matter before the appropriate Division Bench.