// 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.1551/2008 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2694/2008 With D.B. Civil Misc. Stay Application No.2056/2008 {Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited and Another Vs. The State of Rajasthan and Others} Date of Order ::: 01.05.2009 Present Hon'ble the Chief Justice Mr. Deepak Verma Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Shri Virendra Lodha, Counsel for appellants Shri R.P. Garg, Counsel for respondent No.2 Ms. Neelam Pareek, Advocate, for Shri G.K. Garg, Counsel for respondent No.6 #### By the Court:- We have been given to understand by the learned counsel for the appellants that pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 18.03.2009, appellants have also filed another writ appeal challenging the order dated 10th April, 2008 passed in Writ Petition No.7572/2007, but in the said writ appeal, on account of pendency of the present writ appeal, they have not challenged the other order passed by the learned Single Judge on 02.07.2008 in their Writ Petition No.2694/2008. In fact, the appellants would have and could have challenged both the orders, as mentioned herein above, in a single writ appeal, but, for the reasons best known to them, they have filed two writ appeals. To avoid confusion at the time of hearing, // 2 // we direct the appellants to challenge the order dated 02.07.2008, passed in Writ Petition No.2694/2008, in the subsequent writ appeal, which has now been filed. In the pending writ appeal, appellants would be at liberty to move an appropriate application seeking amendment of the writ appeal as also in the prayer clause. On such application being filed, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that he will not oppose to allow the same so that substantial justice between the parties may be done only in one litigation. To overcome the period of limitation, we further direct that being such an application is filed by appellants within a period of thirty days from today then the same shall not be dismissed on the ground of limitation but would be considered on merits. With the aforesaid direction, this appeal stands withdrawn but with no order as to costs. Certified copy of the impugned judgment, challenged in this writ appeal, be returned back to learned counsel for appellants subject to his furnishing a photo copy thereof. In view of this order, the stay application, filed with the writ appeal, does not survive and the same also stands disposed of. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. (Deepak Verma) C.J. //Jaiman//