Lakshmi & ANR. Vs. Govt. of A.P. & Ors.  INSC 355 (4 March 2008)
C.K. THAKKER & D.K. JAIN O R D E R (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 24715/2005) WITH
Civil Appeal No.1782/2008 @ SLP(C)No.25201/2005 Civil Appeal No.1783/2008 @
SLP(C)No.25214/2005 Civil Appeal No.1784/2008 @ SLP(C)No.25229/2005 Civil
Appeal No.1785/2008 @ SLP(C)No.25231/2005 Civil Appeal Nos.1786-87/2008 @
SLP(C)No.1414-1415/2006 Civil Appeal No.1788/2008 @ SLP(C)No.1669/2006 Civil
Appeal No.1789/2008 @ SLP(C)No.8078/2006 Civil Appeal No.1794/2008 @
SLP(C)No.12219/2006 Civil Appeal No.1795/2008 @ SLP(C)No.16150/2006 Civil
Appeal No.1790/2008 @ SLP(C)No.14946/2007 Civil Appeal No.1793/2008 @
SLP(C)No.21305/2007 Contempt P.No.101/2006 in SLP(C)No.3387/2006 Contempt
P.No.102/2006 Contempt P.No.103/2006 in SLP(C)No.3390/2006 Contempt
P.No.104/2006 in SLP(C)No.3388/2006 Leave granted.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
In all these appeals, it is not in dispute by and between the parties that
the Division Bench of the High Court relying on earlier orders passed in other
matters dismissed all these matters and the said orders have been challenged by
the appellants herein. It was stated that even counter affidavits had not been
filed in these matters. It was stated by the learned counsel for the appellants
appearing in these matters that several other questions were also raised which
were not the subject matter of earlier group and were not agitated in those
matters and were not answered one way or the other by the Court raised in these
matters. In all these matters, in our opinion, the abovesaid fact also is not
disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondents.
In view of the aforesaid circumstances, in our opinion, ends of justice
would be met if we set aside the order passed by the High Court and remit the
matters for fresh disposal in accordance with law.
Mr. P.P. Rao learned senior counsel appearing for contesting respondents
contended that when the Division Bench in the order impugned in the present
appeals had not observed anything with regard to other arguments,it should be
presumed :3: that no such argument had been advanced on behalf of the writ
However, in view of the fact stated above, in our opinion, it would be
advisable if the matters are sent to the Division Bench for fresh disposal. The
writ petitions/appeals are, therefore, restored to file. It is, however,
clarified that it is open to the parties to raise all contentions available in
In view of the urgency of the nature and the type of litigation, it would be
appropriate if the High Court decides all the matters as expeditiously as
possible. We would request the High Court to decide them expeditiously. The
contesting respondents will file counter affidavit(s) within six weeks and
rejoinder, if any, will be filed within a period of two weeks thereafter.
Status quo to continue till the disposal of matters by the High Court.
It was stated by the learned counsel for the appellants in some appeals that
the appellants/petitioners intend to amend petition/appeal. It is open to them
to request the High Court and the High Court will pass an appropriate order.
The civil appeals are disposed of. No costs.
The learned counsel for the petitioners in contempt petitions seeks permission
to withdraw the contempt petitions. Permission is granted. The contempt
petitions are dismissed as withdrawn without observing anything on the merits
of the petitions.
Pages: 1 2 3