HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. S. RAMACHANDRA RAO AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD Between: AND 1. The Additional Commissioner (CT) (Legal),, Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad. 2. The Commercial Tax Officer, Jubilee Hills Circle,, Abids Division, Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad. 3. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner, Secunderabad Division, Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad. 4. The Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, Hyderguda Circle,, Nampally Station Road' HYderabad ...RE'P.N,ENTS Petition under Order 47 Rule '1 of CPC R/w. Rule 24 of \N ril Proceedings Rules praying that for the reasons stated in the Memorandum of grounds filed in support thereof, the High Court may be pleased to review the order dated 1411212009 in W.P.No. 17915 of 2009 and restore the writ Petition to file in the interest of justice. This petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the l\ilemorandum of grounds filed in support thereof, and upon reading the order dated 14.12.2009 in W.P.No.17915 of 2009 and upon hearing the arguments of Smt. A. Deepthi, Counsel for the petitioner and Special Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes on behalf of the Respondents, the Court made the following: ORDER "This application has been filed seeking review of the order dated 14.12.2009 passed in WP.No.17915 of 2009. The writ petition was dismissed by this Court on 14.12.2009 on the ground that the counsel representing the counsel on record sought permission of the Court to withdraw the writ petition. Counsel for the applicant in this application states that no such instructions were given to the counsel to withdraw the writ petition and the counsel may have withdrawn the writ petition under bonafide mistake. lt is also pointed out that the party could not be allowed to suffer for lapses on the part of the counsel. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in RAFIQ v. MUSHILAL (AlR 1981 SC 1400) and RAM KUMAR GUPTA v. HAR PRASAD (2010) 1 SCC 3911 wherein t.A.NO. 2 0F 2019 IN WP NO: 17915 OF 2009 tt4/s. Patel Engineering Ltd., Plot No.76, 8-2-2931821A176, Road No.9A, Jubilee Hills, Represented by its Vice President, Sri Sharad Kumar, S/o. Sri K. Sreekantaiah Nanlappa ...pETrroNER the Supreme Court has also held that the parties should not be made to suffer for actions of their counsel who appears before the Court. The respondents in this application frave iot disputed the said legal position but have contested the application on the ground of delay. A Division Bench of this Court on 01.09.2006 in WA.No.881 of 2006 has held that question of delay would not arise for review of the orders passed in writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia and that the provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963, would be inapplicable to the said proceedings. The Special Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes admits that he has no material in his possession to say that the petitioner instructed the then counsel on record to withdraw the writ petition. ln the absence of any such material being placed on record by the respondents, it can be said that the withdrawal of the writ petition by the counsel, without being instructed by the client to do so, has caused serious prejudice to the petitioner. Therefore, we reject the plea of the respondents both on the ground of delay and on the ground that no case is made out for restoration of this writ petition. Other contentions on merits raised by the respondents are not necessary to be gone into at this stage and would be looked into as and when the writ petition is restored and considered on merits. Accordingly, this application is allowed. The order dated 14.12.2009 in WP.No.17915 of 2009 is recalled and the writ petition is restored to the file of this Court. Sd/.K.PRABHAKAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Additional Commissioner (CT) (Legal),, Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad 2. The Commercial Tax Officer, Jubilee Hills Circle,, Abids Division, Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad. 3. The Appellate D'eputy Commissioner (CT), Secunderabad Division, Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad. 4. The Assistant C6mmercial Tax Officer, Hyderguda Circle,, Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad. 5. The Seciion Officer. Writ Division Bench Section, High Court for the State of Telangana 6. One CC to Smt. A. Deepthi, Advocate (OPUC) 7. Two CCs to GP for Commercial Taxes (TG), High Court for the State of Telangana (OUT) B. Two CD Copies IVBC q HIGH COURT DATED: 1110312020 ORDER t.A.NO. 2 0F 2019 IN WP NO: 17915 OF 2009 ALLOWING THE I.A.NO.2 OF 2019 & RESTORING THE WRIT PETITION TO FILE E T (' a't- .s i) !i $\ "D 4eiH '^t' \\ il t) I Ctqt{O =%-