Moolchand Kharaiti Ram Hospita v. Govt. Of N.C.T. Of Delhi & ORS

$~25 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 21917/2005 MOOLCHAND KHARAITI RAM HOSPITAL .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. M. Y. Khan, Adv.

versus GOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELHI & ORS .....Respondents Through:

Ms. Avni Singh, Panel Counsel with Mr. Rushikant, Adv. for R-1.

Mr. Fidel Sebastian and Mr. Rishi Nandy, Advs. for R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE % 03.03.2025

O R D E R

CM APPL. 42711/2024-Delay 12 days in filing restoration application 1.

The present application has been filed by the petitioner seeking condonation of delay of 12 days in filing the application for restoration of the present petition.

2.

For the reasons stated in the application, as also upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the present application is allowed and the delay of 12 days in filing the application for restoration is condoned. 3.

Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of. CM APPL. 42709/2024-For restoration of petition 4.

By virtue of the present application, the petitioner seeks recall and setting aside the order dated 27.05.2024 passed by this Court whereby the present petition has been dismissed for non-prosecution, as also The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

restoration of the said petition to its original stage. 5.

As per the learned counsel for petitioner, though the petitioner upon receipt of notice in an application for early hearing, appeared on 27.05.2024 through video conferencing, however, due to a technical glitch since his attendance was not recorded, the present petition was dismissed for non-prosecution. Thus, the present application. 6.

Issue notice.

7.

Ms. Avni Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.1 and Mr. Fidel Sebastian, learned counsel for respondent no.2, accept notice respectively. 8.

Learned counsel for the respondent no.2 submits that the petitioner cannot be allowed to take benefit of its own wrong, more so, since the impugned Award was passed way back on 03.12.2004. He submits that the present application is without merit as the petitioner is merely trying to buy time. He further submits that the petitioner is a habitual offender who has filed similar applications in various other writ petitions dismissed during the same time of the year when the impugned order dated 27.05.2024 herein was passed.

9.

Viewing the circumstances cumulatively, particularly for the reasons stated in the present application, it would be in the interest of justice if the present application be allowed and the present petition is restored to its original stage, albeit, subject to a cost of Rs.5,000/- to be paid to the respondent no.2 within a period of two weeks. 10.

The application stands disposed of.

CM APPL. 42710/2024-Stay 11.

By virtue of the present application, the petitioner seeks stay on the recovery of gratuity amount and the back wages till the final disposal of The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

the present petition.

12.

Issue notice.

13.

Ms. Avni Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.1 and Mr. Fidel Sebastian, learned counsel for respondent no.2, accept notice respectively. 14.

Learned counsel appearing for respondent no.2 seeks, and is granted, four weeks to file reply. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within two weeks thereafter.

15.

Renotify on 01.05.2025.

SAURABH BANERJEE, J MARCH 3, 2025/bh The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.