CHHOGA RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this review application, the petitioner, who was Sarpanch, has prayed that the order dated 19. 1. 2000 passed in S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3704/97 (Annex. 4) be recalled. It is a brief order which I would like to reproduce, which is as under:- " None present for the petitioner. BY efflux of time and the subsequent events taking place in the matter, this petition has become infructuous. Accordingly, it is disposed as having become infructuous. "

(2.) THE grounds on which review of my order dated 19. 1. 2000 is sought by the petitioners in this application are also required to be reproduced which are as under:- 1. That this case was not listed on regular cause list on 19. 1. 2000. It now appears that the same was came to be listed in the Supplementary Cause List of 19. 1. 2000 which did not come to the notice of the counsel for the petitioner. 2. That the case was disposed of presumably under the impression that action for conducting fresh elections has since been intimated. Nothing turns on the order dated 19. 9. 1997 (Annexure 4 ). 3. That, however, the fact is that the impugned order results in rendering the petitioner ineligible to seek election in terms of Section 38 (3) of Rajasthan Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. 4. In view of the above it is respectfully prayed that the order dated 19. 1. 2000 (Ann. 4) may kindly be recalled and the case may kindly be ordered to be restored to its original number. "

(3.) THEY rightly submitted that looking to the prayer made in the petition and the challenge to the impugned order at Annex. 4, there was no option for this Court but to dispose of the writ petition as having become infructuous by efflux of time and subsequent events taking place in the matter and it cannot be said that there was any error much less error apparent on the face of the record committed by this Court while passing the order dated 19. 1. 2000 whereby the main writ petition was disposed of as having become infructuous.