NANA LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AT the request made by the learned counsel for the appellant -petitioner and looking to the fact that other appeal arising out of the same common order is on Board today, this appeal has also been taken up for consideration.

(2.) THE defects pointed out by the office are taken note of and are waived. By way of this intra -court appeal, the petitioner of CWP No. 9566/2008 seeks to question the order dated 05.02.2013 whereby the learned Single Judge of this Court has dismissed the writ petition, while granting the prayer of the petitioner for withdrawal.

(3.) UPON taking up of this matter for motion -hearing, when we posed the question to the learned counsel for the appellant as to on what ground, if at all, this intra -court appeal is sought to be maintained particularly when a prayer for withdrawal was made on behalf of the petitioner -appellant before the learned Single Judge and, in fact, such a prayer has been granted in the order impugned. The learned counsel responded with the submissions that even while granting such a prayer, the learned Single Judge has proceeded to make observations which are rather in the nature of mandatory directions, as if the respondents were bound to dispossess the petitioner; and referred to the concluding lines of the order impugned. The learned counsel however, frankly pointed out that in fact, after passing of the order dated 05.02.2013, the officers of the concerned Municipal Board proceeded to dispossess the petitioner -appellant and some proceedings for removal of boundary wall have indeed been undertaken. The learned counsel, however, submitted that the respondents have otherwise not taken any decision on the representation made by the petitioner -appellant.