ASHOK KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of instant application Lt. Col. Ashok Kumar (Retd.), Advocate and petitioner, prays that the order dated 14th July, 1997 be recalled, petition be restored and be taken up on Board for disposal. The prayer is vehe mently opposed by the respondents.

(2.) THE order dated 14th July, 1997, sought to be recalled, runs as follows: "hon'ble D. S. Singh, J. Hon'bler. K. Singh, J. Shri Ashok Kumar, the petitioner and Shri Sushil Harkauli, learned Counsel representing the respondents No. 1 and 2, are present. This writ petition was filed in this Court on 21st February, 1992 and came up before the Court for consideration on 24th February, 1992. THE case was called out thrice. THE petitioner was not present. THErefore, the Court directed the case to be listed for admission on 6th April, 1992. THEreafter, the matter came up on 25th August, 1993, but the case was adjourned on the illness slip sent by the petitioner praying for adjournment of the case. On 2nd November, 1993, when the case was came up before the Court, the petitioner got the case adjourned. Again, on 17th January, 1994, the petitioner prayed for adjournment of the case and the case was adjourned. On 3rd March, 1994 also the case was passed over at the request of the petitioner. 20th September, 1996 is another date on which the case was passed over by the Court on the illness slip of the petitioner, praying for ad journment of the case. On 13th December, 1996 the Court once again accommodated the petitioner by adjourn ing the case on his request based on the plea that he had to undergo cataract operation. THEn comes 7th January, 1997 when the case was again adjourned on the illness slip of the petitioner. On 17th April, 1997 the petitioner ob tained the adjournment of the case on the pretext of filing another set of paper-book, which he ought to have filed much earlier. Further, on 5th May, 1997 also the case was adjourned on the request of the petitioner. THE case came up on 22nd May, 1997. THE petitioner appeared and prayed for adjourn ment of the case. THE Court obliged him. Thus, it is amply borne out that the Court has been granting indulgence to the petitioner by accepting his prayer for adjournment repeatedly, considering the fact that he was ap pearing in person. It is apposite to note that the petitioner, who is a retired Lieutenant Colonel, was a member of disciplined force. This apart, he is also an advocate practicing in this Court. THEre fore, the Court is not unjustified in expecting from him a responsible behaviour and co-opera tion. Today, when the Court was convened for its pre-lunch session at 10 a. m. , the petitioner-cum-advocate appeared and made a prayer for adjournment of the case, as usual, on the ground that he had some professional assign ment to look after. He was reminded of the fact that he had already availed the indulgence of the Court many times and was told that his prayer for adjournment of the case would not be enter tained. He was further toad that, at best, the case could be passed over once and would be taken up on revision of the cause-list. THEreupon, the petitioner went away. THE Court presumed that he would turn up to attend the case when it was taken up on revision of the cause-list. On revision of the cause-list, the petitioner did not turn up and the case was passed over once again. THE case has been called out for the third time. At this stage, the petitioner appears and insists that the case be adjourned. THE Court declines to accept his request and calls upon him to proceed with the hearing of the case. But, the petitioner staves that he would not do so and exhorts the Court to do whatever it deems proper. Thus, the Court is left with no option but to dismiss the case for want of prosecution. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. 14-7-1997 Sd. /-D. S. Sinha Sd. /-R. K. Singh. "

(3.) TO buttress his plea for recall of the order dated 14th July, 1997, the petitioner-cum-advocate cited and placed reliance upon the following decisions: (a) AIR 1996 Supreme Court 2439. Bani Singh and others v. State of U. p (b) AIR 1987 Supreme Court 1628. Radheyshayam Dube v. The District Inspector of Schools and others, (c) 1978 Alld. Rent Cases 496. Ramji Dass and others v. Mohan Singh, (d) AIR 1997 Allahabad 291. Mis, Brij Mohan Rice Mill v. Regional Manager U. P. Financial Corporation and another. (e) AIR 1970 Allahabad 257 (F. B.) Seth Munna Lal Seth Jai Prakash,