1 S.B. CIVIL MISC. RESTORATION APPLICATION NO.43/2008 State of Rajasthan & ors. Vs. Smt.Munni Devi & anr. Date of Order :: 18th August 2008. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI Mrs. R.R.Kanwar, Government Counsel for the applicants .... Heard learned Government Counsel and perused the material placed on record including the additional affidavit filed by the Officer-incharge. It was noticed on 05.11.2007 in the writ petition that the same was listed in the Court while preponing the date fixed in the matter at the request of the Government Counsel but then, the writ petition, filed way back on 23.02.2007, remained in defect and even while showing urgency in the matter, no steps were taken for removing the defects; and on the other hand, when the matter was listed in the Court on permission, further time was sought for removing the defects. Noticing the circumstances of this case, this Court passed the order on 05.11.2007 thus: ''This writ petition filed as back as on 23.02.2007 had been lying in defect with the next date fixed as 13.11.2007. However, it appears that a permission was sought on 01.11.2007 and thereupon the matter was permitted to be listed on 02.11.2007. However, the matter has been placed before the Court today only and now the learned Dy.G.A. prays for some time to remove the defects. It is seriously questionable that on the part of the Government Advocate's office a permission was sought and when the matter is listed, the defects have 2 yet not been removed. Having regard to the circumstances of the case it is ordered that if steps are taken for removing the defects during course of the day, the writ petition may be registered to its number and may be placed for the admission. However, in other event i.e. on failure to take effective steps to remove all the defects during the course of the day, the writ petition shall stand dismissed without reference to the court.'' All the defects having not been cured, the office recorded dismissal of the writ petition on 10.01.2008. Though submissions as made by the Officer-incharge in the affidavit of his being not aware of the defects and that the Government Counsel was requested to get the matter listed because impugned order was sought to be got executed, are not complete and are not very convincing; and it is apparent that for substantial length of time, no effective steps were taken on the part of the petitioners to cure the defects and permission to get the matter listed was also moved in a casual manner without taking care to cure the defects in the first place; yet and however, in the interest of justice, it appears appropriate to allow this restoration application and to consider the matter on merits if all the defects are cured but on the condition of the petitioners depositing an amount of Rs.500/- (five hundred) in the legal aid. The restoration application is, therefore, conditionally allowed with the orders and directions that if the petitioners would produce a receipt of deposit of Rs.500/- with the State 3 Legal Services Authority, Jodhpur within a week from today, the writ petition may be restored to its number and if the petitioners satisfy the office that all the defects have been cured, the petition may be placed for admission appropriately. However, on failure on the part of the petitioners to carry out the requirements of this order, this restoration application shall be treated to have been rejected. (DINESH MAHESHWARI), J. MK