RAJEEV CHATURVEDI Vs. COMMISSIONER, JAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant has preferred this Special Appeal (Writ) aggrieved by Order dtd. 19/1/2024, whereby writ petition filed by the respondents was allowed and Orders dtd. 14/6/2022 and 13/4/2023 passed by National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi (for short the 'NCDRC') were quashed and set aside and the appeal before the NCDRC was restored to its original number subject to payment of Rs.10,000.00.

(2.) Brief facts of present appeal are that the respondent-JDA preferred an appeal before the NCDRC and on nonappearance of counsel for the JDA, the appeal was dismissed in default vide order dtd. 14/6/2022. Thereafter, application for recalling of the order dtd. 14/6/2022 was filed on behalf of respondent- JDA, which was dismissed by NCDRC on 13/4/2023. Against the said order, respondent- JDA preferred SLP before the Apex Court bearing Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary NO(S).30332/2023. The said SLP was dismissed as withdrawn on 18/8/2023 and the Apex Court in light of the judgment of M/S Universal Sompo General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Suresh Chand Jain & Anr., granted liberty to the petitioners to withdraw the SLP while reserving the right to approach the High Court for appropriate relief. Respondent- JDA thereafter approached the Rajasthan High Court by filing writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the orders passed by the NCDRC. Learned Single Judge vide order dtd. 19/1/2024 allowed the writ petition and has set aside the orders passed by the NCDRC.

(3.) It is contended by counsel for the appellant- Mr. Manoj Khanna that appellant has filed writ petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India challenging the orders passed by the NCDRC. Since the writ petition has been filed under the supervisory jurisdiction, Rajasthan High Court is not having jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition. It is contended that initially a complaint was filed before the State Commission which was allowed. It is also contended that respondent- JDA has wrongly mentioned in the writ petition that the SLP was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court, as there is no direction in the order passed by the Apex Court permitting the respondent- JDA to file writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court. It is contended that Article 227 of Constitution of India gives power of superintendence to the High Courts over all Courts and Tribunals wihtin its territorial jurisdiction. It is further contended that since the NCDRC is situated at New Delhi and the orders passed by the NCDRC are under challenge by way of filing writ petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India, Rajasthan High Court is not having jurisdiction.