KAMAL PATHAK Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner against the show-cause notice dtd. 2/12/2020 issued under Sec. 39 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009 (In short 'the Act of 2009') whereby the petitioner has been asked to submit his explanation in regard to allegations mentioned in the notice. This Court vide order dtd. 16/12/2020, stayed the operation of notice dtd. 2/12/2020.

(2.) The respondent-State preferred a D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.778/2021, challenging the interim order dtd. 16/12/2020, passed by this Court. The said appeal was decided by the Division Bench vide order dtd. 22/10/2021, with the request to the learned Single Judge to decide the writ petition finally within two weeks from the date of decision. More than one and a half year has passed after the decision of the Division Bench. Today, the petitioner, present in person, seeks adjournment on the ground that his counsel is on strike. The ground mentioned by the petitioner for seeking adjournment is not acceptable, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of "Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal versus Union of India and Anr. (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 132/1998) decided on 17/12/2002.

(3.) The petitioner submits that the show-cause notice dtd. 2/12/2020 under Sec. 39 of the Act of 2009 has been issued to him on false and flimsy ground. In the petition, he has also stated that the explanation to the allegations made against him in the notice under challenge.