KALPANA MUDGAL Vs. NARENDRA BEDI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY filing this review petition, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 16.5.2013 passed in W.P. No. 3573/13. The singular ground advanced by Shri Vivek Jain is that the Writ petition No. 3573/13 was filed on 16.5.2013 and was listed before the bench on the same date. No notice was issued to the other side, yet the Court recorded that "with the consent matter heard finally". Only writ petitioner was heard and matter is finally decided which contains certain observations which are against the interest of the review petitioner. Thus, the bone of contention of Shri Vivek Jain is that the course adopted by the writ court was against the principles of natural justice and without hearing the review petitioner, the said order could not have been passed. Per contra, Shri D.D. Bansal submits that even if the review petitioner would have been noticed and heard, the fate/result would have been the same. He submits that the Writ Court has immense power to pass this kind of order without notice to the other side.

(2.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

(3.) IN : (2012) 9 SCC 683 (Union of India Vs. Sandur Manganese and Iron Ores Limited and others), the Apex Court held that principles of natural justice embody the right of every person to represent his interest to court of justice. Pronouncing a judgment which adversely affects the interest of the party to proceedings who was not given a chance to represent is unacceptable under the principles of natural justice. As analyzed above, the singular contention advanced by the review petitioner has substantial force and needs to be accepted. Resultantly, the order dated 16.5.2013 is recalled/reviewed. The Registry is directed to list W.P. No. 3573/13 for admission before the appropriate bench forthwith.