1 D.B. Special Appeal(Writ) No. 549/2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR JUDGMENT D.B. Special Appeal(Writ) No. 549/2009 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5038/2002 State of Rajasthan Versus Ramesh Chand Sharma & Another. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 12.11.2010 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. S. KOTHARI Mr. Lokendra Singh, for the appellant. The matter has come up for orders on an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 131 days in filing special appeal. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that two similar writ petitions were decided by learned Single Judge vide impugned order dated 18.12.2008 and the appellant preferred two special appeals before Division Bench of this Court alongwith applications under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Connected special appeal arising out of impugned order i.e. D. B. Special Appeal(Writ) No. 562/2009 was listed before Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 2 D.B. Special Appeal(Writ) No. 549/2009 10.11.2010. Co-ordinate Bench of this Court examined the matter on merits also and did not interfere in the order passed by learned Single Judge and disposed off special appeal, stay application and application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Learned counsel for the appellant, therefore, contended that present special appeal is similar to D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 562/2009, therefore, same order may also be passed in the present special appeal. 3. Order passed in D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 562/2009 by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 10.11.2010 reads as under: “We have heard the learned Additional Advocate General for the State. Through, the matter has been listed from the defect side. We have examined the matter on merits and impugned judgment also. The writ petition was preferred by the State against the award passed by the learned Labour Court whereby the learned Labour Court had passed the award granting 25% of the back wages in lieu of reinstatement. Learned Single Judge modified the aforesaid award after hearing the parties and has allowed lump sum compensation of Rs. 1 lac. Having heard learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State, we are of the view that the aforesaid decision of the leaned Single Judge does not warrant any interference and the discretion 3 D.B. Special Appeal(Writ) No. 549/2009 in the matter has been exercised judiciously. We find no merit in the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal, stay application and the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act stands disposed of.” 4. Since present matter is fully covered by above judgment passed in similar special appeal, therefore, for the same reasons and as contended and agreed by learned counsel for the appellant, present special appeal, stay application and application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act stand disposed of. (S.S. KOTHARI),J. (NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN),J. Manoj, Item No. 13.