Bhudeshwar Gorai vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors

In view of outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic, case has been taken up through Video Conferencing. Concerned lawyers have no objection with regard

to the proceeding, which has been held through Video Conferencing today at 10:30 A.M. onwards. They have no complaint in respect to the audio and

video clarity and quality.

This interlocutory application has been preferred for amendment in the prayer portion of the original writ petition.

At the very outset, learned counsel for the respondents submits that there is an alternative remedy under the provision of Section 57 of SPT Act and

as the impugned order was passed much before filing of the writ petition, this writ petition is not maintainable.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order was passed during the pendency of the writ petition and as such,

seeks amendment in the original writ petition.

Heard the parties.

The original writ petition was filed on 22.12.2012, whereas the order passed by the Commissioner is dated 26.10.2012. The submission of learned

counsel for the petitioner that as the order was passed during the pendency of the writ petition, he seeks amendment in the prayer portion of the main

writ petition, which is not accepted to this Court.

Prima Facie, from face of records, it appears that impugned order was passed much earlier to filing of the original writ petition and also there is a

provision of Section 57 of SPT Act and the petitioner without availing the alternative remedy available to him, has rushed to this Court, this writ

petition as well as interlocutory application are not maintainable. Accordingly, this writ petition as well as interlocutory application stand dismissed.

It is made clear that this Court has not entered into the merits of the case.

However, the petitioner is at liberty to file an appeal before the Competent Authority.