JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)This appeal has been filed by the appellants against the order of learned Single Judge dated 23.4.2013 by which a very innocuous order of deciding representation has been given.
There is some delay in filing the appeal which has been explained in the affidavit.
Ground is that the present appellants who were respondent Nos. 6 and 7 in the writ petition were not noticed and they had no information/intimation about the writ petition. They only came to know about the order when notices were given by the educational authorities to them to appear and prove certain facts.
(2.)Argument is that in the garb of innocuous order of deciding the representation, here is a case where the frivolous and stale claim of the writ petitioners has been permitted to be reopened and the validly elected Committee of Management on account of political influence in the garb of verifying correct facts is in serious threat of harassment and the great injustice.
(3.)Argument is that in normal situation the direction as claimed may be innocuous and that may be given but if a party comes to this Court and demonstrates that either the claim is not triable or that is frivolous or that is stale and that is capable of just causing the injury and harassment to the other side then that exercise is either not to be done or if the direction has been given that is to be withdrawn.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.