SANJAY KUMAR Vs. KAMAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The grievance of the Petitioner in this petition is that Respondent No. 2, Divisional Commissioner, Kangra at Dharamshala pre-poned the matter and granted stay to Respondent No. 1 (Appellant before the Divisional Commissioner) without issuing notice to him.

(2.) Records/file of the Divisional Commissioner have been perused. On 9.7.2008 the then Divisional Commissioner Kangra took up the matter at Una in the presence of Shri N.K. Bali, Advocate counsel for the Appellant (Respondent herein) and Shri P.C. Sharma, Advocate counsel for the present Petitioner (Respondent before the Appellate Court). After hearing the counsel for the parties and going through the record of the Subordinate Court, the Divisional Commissioner came to the conclusion that No. ground is made out for staying the order of the Subordinate Court. He, however, called for the records of the Subordinate Court and fixed the case for arguments on 13.8.2008.

(3.) There after the case was adjourned on one ground or the other. It appears that the case was being listed at Una and the tour of the Divisional Commissioner who is stationed at Dharamshala was being cancelled time and again, with the result that the case got unnecessarily delayed. Since the stay order had been refused in favour of the Appellant before the Divisional Commissioner, he applied for early hearing of the case and prayed that the case which had been fixed for 17.6.2009 be pre-poned. It is not clear whether any order was passed or whether any notice of this application was sent to the Respondent. Thereafter the matter kept getting adjourned and was not taken up. It appears that a notice was affixed on the notice board that the case would be taken up on 10.8.2009 at Una.