1 D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL(W)NO.382/2008 Shravan Kumar & Anr. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of Judgment :: 04-07-2008 HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. NARAYAN ROY HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAGHUVENDRA S. RATHORE Mr. B.N. Kalla, for the appellant. Mr. H.S. Sandhu, for the respondent. This appeal is directed against the order dated 15.2.2007 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court whereby the writ petition has been dismissed summarily. 2. The petitioner Shravan Kumar, also the appellant herein, filed the writ petition invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court to challenge the orders passed by the Executive Engineer, Hanumangarh(Annex.4) dated 5.5.2006 and the order dated 10.7.2006(Annex.5) passed by the Superintending Engineer, Hanummangarh. 3. In fact earlier, an order was passed by the Executive Engineer without hearing Amar Singh the respondent No.3 herein, which was challenged in appeal before the Superintending Engineer, Suratgarh who had set aside the said order on 13.12.2005 and directed the parties to appear before the Executive Engineer who was to decide the matter afresh. Subsequent to this, the aforesaid orders came to be passed by the Executive Engineer and thereafter by the Superintending Engineer. 2 4. A look to the order passed by the Executive Engineer, Hanumangarh goes to show that the matter was decided with the consent of the parties. However, even then the appellant preferred an appeal before the Superintending Engineer, Hanumangarh and the same was dismissed in appeal upholding the order passed by the Executive Engineer on 5.5.2006. The appellant then challenged the order of the Executive as well as Superintending Engineer before the learned Single Judge, who by his order under challenge, had upheld the said orders and dismissed the writ petition summarily. 5. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the fact that both the authorities below namely, the Executive Engineer as well as the Superintending Engineer have given concurrent finding of fact and decided against the appellant, and while upholding the said orders the learned Single Judge had declined to exercise his equitable/discretionary jurisdiction under the Constitution. Moreover,it is to be noted that the order passed by the Executive Engineer was with the consent of the parties. 6. In view of the aforesaid reasons, we do not find any just reason for interference as there is no fault in the orders passed by the courts below. 7. Consequently, the appeal has no force and is dismissed in limine. [RAGHUVENDRA S.RATHORE],J. [NARAYAN ROY],CJ. Praveen 3