1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR -------------------------------------------------------- 1. SPL. APPL. WRIT No. 185 of 2003 U.I.T.,JODHPUR V/S SMT.BHANWARI DEVI & ANR 2. SPL. APPL. WRIT No. 180 of 2003 U.I.T., JODHPUR V/S SMT.RENU CHATERJI & ORS 3. SPL. APPL. WRIT No. 182 of 2003 SMT. RENU CHATREJI V/S STATE OF RAJ. & ORS 4. SPL. APPL. WRIT No. 369 of 2003 L.I.C. LTD. V/S SMT.BHANWARI DEVI & ORS Mr. DS RAJVI, for the U.I.T. Mr. MS SINGHVI for Smt. Bhanwari Devi, & Mr. MR SINGHVI, for Jalte Deep. Date of Order : 15.9.2008 HON'BLE SHRI N P GUPTA,J. HON'BLE SHRI KISHAN SWAROOP CHAUDHARI,J. ORDER ----- All these four matters arise out of the common judgment of the learned Single Judge dt. 21.1.2003. There were three writ petitions before the learned Single Judge being Civil Writ Petition Nos. 5416/1993, 3132/1993, and 3590/1993. 2 Against the judgment rendered in Writ Petition No. 5416/1993 Magha Ram Vs. State, an appeal was filed before the Division Bench being D.B. S.A.W. No. 186/2003 which has been dismissed by the Division Bench on 20.3.2003. Significantly the same Bench on the same day admitted the other three appeals. In this background what is significant to note is that while rendering the judgment, the learned Single Judge has taken the facts of the writ petition of Magha Ram, as leading facts, while the submission of the learned counsel for the parties is, that the facts of these two writ petitions, giving rise to the present appeals, were not similar to that of Magha Ram. In our view this submission appears to be having force, as is clear from the fact, that the same Bench, on the same day, while dismissing the S.A.W. No. 186/2003, has admitted these appeals. In these circumstances, the net result comes out to is, that the judgment rendered by the learned Single Judge stands judgment rendered in Magha Ram's case, which has acquired finality upto the Division Bench, by dismissal of S.A.W. No. 186/2003, but the other two writ petitions, being 3132 and 3590 of 1993 did not receive consideration of learned Single Judge on merits. 3 In that view of the matter, we think it appropriate to send back, and do hereby send back these matters to the learned Single Judge, by directing writ petitions no. 3132 and 3590 of 1993 to be restored to the learned Single Judge, for deciding the matters afresh on their own merits, in accordance with law. The parties are directed to appear before the learned Single Judge on 22.9.2008. Fresh notice need not be issued. Interim order passed by this Court on 5.8.2008 shall continue upto 22.9.2008, and the learned Single Judge will consider the request of the party concerned on stay, and pass fresh appropriate orders on stay, in accordance with law, without in any manner being obsessed by the fact of interim order having been passed by the Division Bench. The applications filed before the Division Bench, for impleadment of parties, for interim stay, so also for vacating the stay order, be also transmitted to learned Single Judge, for disposal on merits in accordance with law. This disposes of all the four appeals. ( KISHAN SWAROOP CHAUDHARI ),J. ( N P GUPTA ),J. /Sushil/