AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Mohan Shantanagoudar
The grievance of the petitioner is that his application-I.A.I/2010 field u/s 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for grant of interim order of stay is not considered by the first respondent in (M.U.N.) Appeal No. 122/2010-11.
The records reveal that the petitioner has filed (M.U.N.) Appeal No. 122/2010-11 before the first respondent questioning the order passed by the second respondent. In the said appeal, the petitioner has made an application-I.A.I/2010 praying for stay of the order passed by the 2nd respondent. The same is not considered by the first respondent. Hence, this writ petition is filed.
There is no reason as to why I.A.I/2010 filed by the petitioner should not be considered by the first respondent, though the same was field in the month of October 2010, According to the petitioner, he has got urgency and therefore he needs interim order. It is for the Deputy Commissioner to decide as to whether the petitioner is entitled to the interim order or not. If the petitioner is entitled to interim order, the same should be granted in his favour. If he is not entitled for interim order, then the application may be rejected. In case, if the authority decides that the appeal itself should be heard at an early date, it is open for him to hear the appeal on merits at an early date. But, in the matter on hand, neither the appeal is decided nor the application for interim order is heard.
Therefore, the first respondent is directed to hear either I.A.I/2010 for interim prayer filed by the petitioner in (M.U.N.) Appeal No. 122/2010-11 or hear the main appeal itself as early as possible, but not later than outer limit of two months from the date of receipt of this order. Till such consideration, interim order granted by this Court will continue.
Writ petition is displayed of accordingly.