MOHAN LAL GUPTA Vs. HARYANA TELECOM CIRCLE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -Though these four cases have been wrongly numbered as first appeals by the Registry, they are only revision petitions inasmuch as the challenge in the four cases is directed against the order passed by the State Commission in its first appellate jurisdiction. The office should have registered these four cases as revision petitions and they should have been posted for preliminary hearing. However, inasmuch as these cases have been posted today before us for final hearing, we do not want to dilate further on that technical aspect.

(2.) When these cases were taken up for hearing, the common petitioner in these cases was not present either in person or through his Advocate. The notice intimating Counsel about the posting of these cases to today had been served on the appellant's Advocate on 9th December, 1992 and there is no reason why he should not appear before us today or should not have atleast arranged for a representation being made on his behalf, in case he was under any difficulty. Inasmuch as neither of these courses has been adopted by the Counsel for the petitioners and the party also is not present in person, these revision petitions have to be disposed of in their absence.

(3.) We have gone through the revision petitions and we find that they do not involve any question of jurisdiction. Hence there is no scope for any interference by us with the orders passed by the State Commission, in the exercise of our revisional power. These revision petitions are dismissed on this short ground. No costs. Revision Petitions dismissed.