RAJNI DEVI Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel for the parties. As short question is involved, appeal is taken up for final disposal forthwith, by consent.

(2.) THIS appeal takes exception to the decision of the learned Single Judge of this Court, dated 7th August, 2012, in CWP No.797 of 2009-B, whereby writ petition filed by the petitioner challenging the decision of the Divisional Commissioner, Mandi, Division Mandi, dated 4th March, 2009 came to be rejected. It is indisputable that the writ petition was heard ex-parte against the petitioner. No appearance was made on behalf of the petitioner. The learned Single Judge, after adverting to certain documents, noted that the said evidence ought to have been led before the Deputy Commissioner and the Divisional Commissioner; and the High Court is not required to consider the documents and give its finding on facts. The grievance of the appellant is that the documents referred to in the writ petition were not relied upon for the first time before this Court, but were already part of record before the Authorities, who decided the controversy regarding the eligibility of the petitioner. That grievance is reinforced from the reasons recorded by the Deputy Commissioner Mandi District as well as Divisional Commissioner, Mandi Division. It is not as if the documents relied by the petitioner in the writ petition were brought on record for the first time in the writ petition. Since that was the main basis on which the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner, the appropriate course, in our opinion, would be to relegate the parties before the learned Single Judge for reconsideration of the writ petition, on its own merits, in accordance with law.

(3.) ACCORDINGLY , this appeal succeeds. The impugned judgment and order is set aside and the parties are relegated before the learned Single Judge for reconsideration of the writ petition afresh.