Summary
After a writ petition about condonation of delay in a Panchayat revision was disposed of on the respondent's statement that he would provide a 3-metre access, the High Court allowed the respondent's 'Application for Speaking to the Minutes' and modified the disposal order to tie the access to a plan marked 'X', and dismissed the appellant's review. The Supreme Court set aside both orders and restored the application to be decided afresh after hearing both sides, within the limited scope of such applications, without expressing any view on the merits.
Issues
- Whether the High Court's orders allowing the respondent's Application for Speaking to the Minutes, which modified the operative paragraph of the order disposing of the writ petition, and dismissing the appellant's review application, could be sustained when the appellant had not been heard on the modification sought.
Held
- The appellant contended that the application, filed about a month after the disposal order and decided a year later, had been treated as if the High Court were exercising review jurisdiction, although an application for speaking to the minutes can only correct clerical or typographical errors, and that the plan relied on by the respondent had never been accepted by the appellant. Without deciding these contentions, the Court held that the interests of justice required that the appellant be given an opportunity to contest the application, while the respondent should equally have the opportunity to seek the modification and rectification he sought. (¶¶ 9, 10)
- The High Court must take up and dispose of the restored application on its own merits after hearing both parties, keeping in mind the scope of such applications as laid down in Akhil Bhartvarshiya Marwari Agarwal Jatiya Kosh v. Brijlal Tibrewal (2018 INSC 1215). The Court expressed no opinion on the merits. (¶ 11)
Result
Delay condoned; leave granted; appeals allowed. The High Court's orders dated 28.02.2023 (in Misc. Civil Application No. 176/2022 in Writ Petition No. 157 of 2019) and 18.01.2024 (in Review Application (Civil) No. 10/2023) set aside; Misc. Civil Application No. 176/2022 restored to its original number to be decided on its own merits after hearing both parties.