IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 349 of 2008 (M/S) Smt. Kumud Saklani, D/O Shri B.D. Sak Saklani, R/O 47 Saraswati Soni Marg. Laxman Chowk, Dehradun. ……….. Petitioner. Versus Sh. Deepak Badoni, son of Late Sh. Ra.P. Badoni, Resident of 20/3 Pleasant Valley Dehradun. ………. Respondent. Sri Ghanshyam Joshi, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Arvind Vashist, learned counsel for the petitioner. None for the respondent despite sufficient service. Date May 21, 2009. Hon’ble B.S. Verma, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. Admit the writ petition. The writ petition has been preferred for issuing a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 15-2-2008 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun in Suit No. 285 of 2005, Deepak Badoni Vs. Smt. Kumud Saklani, whereby the permission granted to the parties to appear through lawyers was recalled and the parties were directed to conduct their case personally themselves. A perusal of record shows that the petitioner was married to respondent at Dehradun according to Hindu rites and the petitioner filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights (No. 633 of 1994, Smt. Kumud Badoni Vs. Shri Deepak Badoni) in the Court of Civil judge, Dehradun., which was ultimately dismissed in the absence of the parties vide order dated 30-6-1995. Thereafter, The respondent-Deepak Badoni filed a petition for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act bearing Suit No. 285 of 2005 against the petitioner before the Family Court Dehradun. The petitioner filed her written statement. Subsequently, by order dated 10-7-2007, the opportunity of cross-examination was closed to the petitioner. The petitioner moved an application under Order, 9 Rule 7 C.P.C. for recalling the order dated 10-7-2007. According to the petitioner, the said application was ordered to be put up on the date fixed, i.e. 4-9-2007. Subsequently, on 6-11-2007, the date fixed for disposal of application was 8-1- 2008. On 8-1-2008, the respondent moved an application with the request that the hearing may be done day today in the matter. The grievance of the petitioner is that by order dated 15-2-2008 impugned in this writ petition, the permission to conduct the case through lawyer has been withdrawn by the Principal Judge, Family Court, which is not justified. It reveals from a perusal of the order-sheet dated 15-2- 2008 that the lawyers were on strike on that day. The petition field by the respondent against the petitioner is under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The respondent is not represented before this court despite sufficient service. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the order dated 15-2-2008 is not tenable in the eye of law because a litigant cannot be directed to defend his/her case without the assistance of a lawyer of his/her choice. In the above facts and circumstances as well as considering the fact that the respondent has not appeared despite Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun, is liable to be set aside. The writ petition deserves to be allowed outright. The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 15-02-2008 is quashed. Both the parties are allowed to be represented through their lawyers. However, the Principal Judge, Family Court Dehradun is directed to decide the proceedings between the parties pending before it in accordance with law, expeditiously as far as possible without any unnecessary delay. Both the parties shall co-operate in the speedy decision of the case. Costs easy. (B.S. Verma, J.) RCP