LATIKA SHARAD JOSHI Vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule with the consent of the parties made returnable forthwith and heard.

(2.) The above petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India takes exception to the order dated 30/05/2011 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Nagpur, by which order the revision application filed by the petitioners came to be rejected.

(3.) The principal ground of challenge in the above petition is that the impugned order has been passed by the Additional Commissioner rejecting the said revision application, in the absence of the petitioners. It is the case of the petitioners that since the matter on 20th May, 2011 was adjourned to 10/06/2011, the petitioners were under an impression that the said revision application would be taken up for hearing on the said date. However, the Additional Commissioner respondent No.3 herein preponed the matter from 10/06/2011 to 27/ 05/2011, considering the directions passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 1977/2011 by order dated 30th April, 2011, by which order, the Additional Commissioner was directed to hear and decide the said revision application by 30th May, 2011. It is the case of the petitioners that the notice of preponement was not served upon them, but was purportedly served on some Chowkidar whose endorsement is found on the said notice. It is the case of the petitioners that they have no such Chowkidar at the residential premises wherein they are staying.