IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Civil Misc. Application No. of 2009
IN
C.W. No. 370/88
IN THE MATTER OF:
Ex. Constable R.K. Lakra … Petitioner
VERSUS
Union of India & Ors. … Respondents
INDEX
S.No. Particulars Pages
1. Notice of Motion
2. Urgent Application
3. Memo of Parties
4. Civil Misc. Application under
Section 151 CPC for restoration
of WP(C) No. 370/88
along with affidavit.
5. ANNEXURE – P-1
Certified copy of order dated
19.09.2002.
6. Vakalatnama
Filed by:
AJIT KUMAR & SUNIL SINGH
Advocates
nd
2 Floor, Bar Lounge
Delhi High Court
New Delhi – 110001
New Delhi
Dated:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Civil Misc. Application No. of 2009
IN
C.W. No. 370/88
IN THE MATTER OF:
Ex. Constable R.K. Lakra … Petitioner
VERSUS
Union of India & Ors. … Respondents
NOTICE OF MOTION
To
The Standing Counsel (Criminal)
High Court of Delhi
New Delhi
Sir,
Kindly take notice that the accompanying Application
U/s. 151 C.P.C. has moved in the above referred matter.
The same is likely to be listed on ___ July, 2009 or soon
thereafter.
Yours sincerely,
AJIT KUMAR & SUNIL SINGH
Advocates
nd
2 Floor, Bar Lounge
Delhi High Court
New Delhi – 110001
New Delhi
Dated:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Civil Misc. Application No. of 2009
IN
C.W. No. 370/88
IN THE MATTER OF:
Ex. Constable R.K. Lakra … Petitioner
VERSUS
Union of India & Ors. … Respondents
MEMO OF PARTIES
Ex. Constable R.K. Lakra
S/o. Shri Ram Chander
R/o. 600-A/3, Mehrauli
New Delhi … Petitioner
VERSUS
1. Union of India through Secretary
Ministry of Home Affairs
New Delhi
2. Shri A.V. Vohra
Commandant 76 CPT
New Traffic Building
40, CGR Road, Kolkata
3. Deputy Inspector General
C.I.S.F., 41 Karaya Road
Park Circus
Kolkata – 700017
4. Director General, CISF
Block No.13, CGO Complex
Lodhi Road, New Delhi … Respondents
Filed by:
AJIT KUMAR & SUNIL SINGH
Advocates
New Delhi
Dated:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Civil Misc. Application No. of 2009
IN
C.W. No. 370/88
IN THE MATTER OF:
Ex. Constable R.K. Lakra … Petitioner
VERSUS
Union of India & Ors. … Respondents
URGENT APPLICATION
To
The Registrar
High Court of Delhi
New Delhi
Sir,
Kindly treat the accompanying Civil Miscellaneous
Application as urgent one under the High Court
Rules & Procedure. The ground of urgency is that:
“Restoration of Civil Writ Petition No. 370 of
1988”, is prayed for”.
AJIT KUMAR & SUNIL SINGH
Advocates
nd
2 Floor, Bar Lounge
Delhi High Court
New Delhi – 110001
New Delhi
Dated:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Civil Misc. Application No. of 2009
IN
C.W. No. 370/88
IN THE MATTER OF:
Ex. Constable R.K. Lakra … Petitioner
VERSUS
Union of India & Ors. … Respondents
APPLICATION UNDER ORDER SECTION 151 CPC
FOR RESTORATION OF THE ABOVE PETITION TO
ITS ORIGINAL NUMBER.
To
The Hon’ble Chief Justice and
His Companion Justices of the
Hon’ble High Court of Delhi
At New Delhi
The humble application of the
Petitioner above named
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. That the petitioner had filed a Writ Petition
(Civil) No. 370 of 1988 for quashing of the orders
dated 26.11.84, order dated 17.07.85 and order
dated 22/23.01.1986 passed by the respondent
No.2, respondent No.3 and respondent No.4
respectively and seeking directions to the
respondents to reinstate the petitioner along
with consequential benefits.
2. That the petitioner has been appearing regularly
during the proceedings. Initially, the petitioner
engaged Shri Swatanter Kumar, Advocate as his
counsel, however he was later on promoted as
Hon’ble Judge of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi
and his case was referred to Ms. Geeta Mittal,
the then Advocate for pursuing further in the
petitioner’s case.
3. That later on, Ms. Geeta Mittal, Advocate was
also promoted as Hon’ble Judge of the Hon’ble
High Court of Delhi. But the status of the
petitioner’s case was not informed to the
petitioner.
4. That thereafter, in or around end-March, 2009
the petitioner contacted another counsel to
know about the status of his case. The said
counsel during inspection obtained the certified
copies of the case file and on scrutiny it was
found that the petition of the petitioner was
dismissed due to non-prosecution vide order
dated 19.09.2002 passed by the Hon’ble Mr.
Justice B.A. Khan and Hon’ble Mr. Justice J.D.
Kapoor. Certified copy of the order dated
19.09.2002 is annexed as Annexure – P-1.
5. That it is pertinent to mention here that since
the petitioner is an illiterate person and is not
aware of the court process. However, the
petitioner was not informed about the case
status by any counsel.
6. That there was no intention or willful act on the
part of the petitioner in not pursuing his case,
rather the circumstance has actuated due to the
aforesaid reason which was beyond the control
of the petitioner.
7. That in case the aforesaid petition is not
restored to its original number, the petitioner
shall suffer irreparable loss and injury which
cannot be compensated in any manner.
8. That the petitioner undertakes to be more
vigilant and cautious in future and shall attend
the proceedings without fail, in case the above
writ petition is restored to its original number.
PRAYER
It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble
Court may graciously be pleased to:
a) restore the above Writ Petition (Civil) No. 370
of 1988 to its original number;
b) pass such other and further orders which this
Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the
facts and circumstances of the case and in the
interest of justice.
PETITIONER
Through
AJIT KUMAR & SUNIL SINGH
Advocates
nd
2 Floor, Bar Lounge
Delhi High Court
New Delhi – 110001
New Delhi
Dated:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Civil Misc. Application No. of 2009
IN
C.W. No. 370/88
IN THE MATTER OF:
Ex. Constable R.K. Lakra … Petitioner
VERSUS
Union of India & Ors. … Respondents
AFFIDAVIT
I, Ex. Constable R.K. Lakra, S/o. Shri Ram Chander,
R/o. 600-A/3, Mehrauli, New Delhi do hereby solemnly
affirm and declare as under:
1. That I am the petitioner in the above noted case
and being well conversant with the facts and
circumstances of the case, hence I am competent
to swear this affidavit.
2. That the accompanying application for
restoration of the above writ petition, has been
drafted by my counsel under my instructions.
Contents of the same have been read over and
explained to me in my vernacular language and
after hearing and understanding the contents of
the same, I admit that the same are true and
correct.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
Verified at New Delhi on this ___ day of July, 2009 that
the contents of the above affidavit are true and correct to
the best of my knowledge and belief.
DEPONENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Civil Misc. Application No. of 2009
IN
C.W. No. 370/88
IN THE MATTER OF:
Ex. Constable R.K. Lakra … Petitioner
VERSUS
Union of India & Ors. … Respondents
APPLCIATION U/S. 5 OF LIMITATION ACT FOR
CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE
RESTORATION APPLCIATION.
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. That the applicant/ petitioner had filed the
above noted C.W. No. 370/88 and later on filed
an application for restoration of the above case
before this Hon’ble Court.
2. That the applicant/petitioner had been
appearing regularly during the above
proceedings. Initially, the petitioner engaged
Shri Swatanter Kumar, Advocate through Legal
Aid as his counsel, however he was later on
promoted as Hon’ble Judge of Hon’ble High
Court of Delhi and his case was referred to Ms.
Geeta Mittal, the then Advocate for pursuing
further in the petitioner’s case.
3. That later on, Ms. Geeta Mittal, Advocate was
also promoted as Hon’ble Judge of the Hon’ble
High Court of Delhi. But the status of the
petitioner’s case was not informed to the
petitioner.
4. That thereafter, in or around end-March, 2009
the petitioner contacted another counsel to
know about the status of his case. The said
counsel during inspection obtained the certified
copies of the case file and on scrutiny it was
found that the petition of the petitioner was
dismissed due to non-prosecution vide order
dated 19.09.2002 passed by the Hon’ble Mr.
Justice B.A. Khan and Hon’ble Mr. Justice J.D.
Kapoor.
5. That it is pertinent to mention here that since
the petitioner is an illiterate person and is not
aware of the court process. However, the
petitioner was not informed about the case
status by any counsel, except the present
counsel.
6. That thereafter, applicant took the advise of
other counsels and approached the present
counsel in the 1st week of August, 2009 for
moving appropriate application before this
Hon’ble Court. As such, during the entire
process a delay of 6 years 10 months and 24
days has occurred. However, there was no
intention or willful act on the part of the
applicant/ petitioner in filing the application.
7. That in case the delay in filing the accompanying
application for restoration is not condoned by
this Hon’ble Court, the applicant shall be put to
irreparable loss and injury which cannot be
compensated in any manner.
PRAYER
It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble
Court may kindly be pleased to condone the delay of
6 years 10 months and 24 days in filing the
accompanying application for restoration of the above
case, in the interest of justice.
APPLICANT/PETITONER
Through
AJIT KUMAR & SUNIL SINGH
Advocates
New Delhi
Dated:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Civil Misc. Application No. of 2009
IN
C.W. No. 370/88
IN THE MATTER OF:
Ex. Constable R.K. Lakra … Petitioner
VERSUS
Union of India & Ors. … Respondents
AFFIDAVIT
I, Ex. Constable R.K. Lakra, S/o. Shri Ram Chander,
R/o. 600-A/3, Mehrauli, New Delhi do hereby solemnly
affirm and declare as under:
1. That I am the petitioner in the above noted case
and being well conversant with the facts and
circumstances of the case, hence I am competent
to swear this affidavit.
2. That the accompanying application for
condonation of delay has been drafted by my
counsel under my instructions. Contents of the
same have been read over and explained to me in
my vernacular language and after hearing and
understanding the contents of the same, I admit
that the same are true and correct.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
Verified at New Delhi on this ___ day of August, 2009
that the contents of the above affidavit are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
DEPONENT
