Two petitions filed on same subject matter through same lawyer

HC takes serious note issue notices to petitioner, his lawyer

19/05/2018

JAMMU, May 18: Justice Dhiraj Singh of J&K High Court took serious note in matter where same person filed two petitions on same subject matter through same lawyer, issued notice to petitioner Sahil Gupta and his counsel Adv Munish Sharma to explain their position on the next date of hearing.
When the matter came-up for hearing, Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur after hearing Adv Munish Sharma for the petitioner whereas Deputy AG Sanjeev Padha for the state observed that instant application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, seeking withdrawal of writ petition bearing SWP No. 429/201 and no reasons were stated in the said application, as to why the petition filed was sought to be withdrawn at this stage.
Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur further observed that however, on a perusal of the objections filed by the Stale in SWP No. 429/2018, it transpired that the petitioner has concealed the fact that he had earlier filed the writ petition bearing SWP No. 306/2018 and it further surfaced that the petitioner had filed SWP No. 306/2018 in regard to the same subject-matter. Prom the record, it appears that SWP No. 429/2018 is nothing but a photocopy of the petition bearing SWP No. 306/2018. filed earlier in regard to the same cause of action.
It also transpired that when the earlier writ petition SWP No. 306/2018 was come up before the Writ Court on 27-02-2018, following order was passed. "Admit, Issue post admission notice. Notice in MP also" Dasti service is also permitted and List on 20th March, 2018. Selection/ appointment of private respondent No. 4 shall remain subject to the final outcome of the writ petition,”.
Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur further observed that it appears that the petitioner did not take steps for service of respondents in the said petition, not with standing the fact that he was permitted to serve the respondents through "Dasti Service as well. Instead of this, the petitioner chose to file SWP No. 429/2018, on similar facts challenging the same order dated 17-02-2018. The Court in the said petition on 19-03-2018, was ignorant about the pendency of the earlier writ petition was pleased to pass the following order (Issue notice to the respondents, returnable within four weeks. Requisite steps within one week. List on 09-05-2018. In the meanwhile, subject to objections from other side and till next date of hearing, selection of private respondents No. 4 for the post of Pharmacist UPHC Naag Nagar, Kathua made in pursuance of notification No. 5 of 2017-18 dated 21-11-2017 shall remain stayed provided the same is not already operated. Alternation/ modification no motion").
Justice DS Thakur further observed that the petitioner in SWP no. 429/2018 chose to remain silent deliberately regarding filling of the earlier petition and the fact that he had failed to get an appropriate stay order in the same. The subsequent petition appears to have been filed only because the petitioner had failed to obtain the order to his liking. Incidentally, the petitioner is same in both the writ petitions. Even, the counsel representing the petitioner is same, Court observed.
It appears that having realized after the filing of objections by the State that the methodology adopted by the petitioner would attract some harsh action, the petitioner chose to file the application bearing MP No. 2/2018 seeking withdrawal of SWP No. 429/2018. The petitioner has clearly abused the process of law. According, his request for withdrawal of the writ petition SWP No. 429/2018 is rejected, Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur said.
Court further ordered that this order shall form a part of the record in SWP No. 429/20/8 as also in SWP No. 306/2018 and listed the matter for approprite orders on June 4, 2018 and also issued notices to the petitioner as also his counsel Advocate Munish Sharma to explain their position on the next date of hearing. JNF

Photo Gallery

BSE Sensex

NSE Nifty