KICHHA SUGAR COMPANY LTD Vs. SUKUT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AFTER hearing the learned counsel for the parties, what emerges is that respondent no. 2 passed the impugned order dated 31.03.2006 in favour of respondent no. 1 and against the writ petitioner in purported exercise of the jurisdiction purportedly vesting in him in terms of 1958 Standing Orders, whereas it is undisputed case of the parties that at the time of the initiation of the proceedings as well as the passing of the aforesaid order, the Standing Order issued vide Notification No. 5692(HI)/XXXVI -2 -110(HI) -77 dated 27th September, 1988 had come into force.

(2.) IT is further undisputed case of the parties that it is in terms of the aforesaid 1988 Standing Orders that respondent no. 2 had the jurisdiction to decide the issue relating to the correction of the 'Date of Birth of respondent no. 1.

(3.) BY invoking 1958 Standing Orders as well as by exercising the jurisdiction under the said Standing Orders, respondent no. 2 had committed a patent illegality and, therefore, the impugned order suffers from a patent lack of jurisdiction.