B.S.Chauhan, J. - (1.) This writ petition is not maintainable as it is barred by Order 2, Rule 2 , C.P.C. The petitioner is aggrieved by the circle rate fixed by the District Collector, Jhansi. Earlier also being aggrieved by the same cause of action, i.e. fixation of circle rate fixed by the District Collector, Jhansi, he filed Writ Petition No. 39762 of 2005 seeking a direction from the Court that in view of the fact that the circle rate fixed by the District Collector is unreasonable and arbitrary, the District Collector may be directed to purchase the land of the petitioner at the circle rate fixed by him. The said writ petition was dismissed vide order dated 17.5.2005. This petition has been filed now challenging the circle rate. Therefore, the cause of action is the same as was involved in the earlier writ petition.
(2.) Thus, in view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that the petition should not be maintained in view of Order 2, Rule 2 , C.P.C. read with Section 11 (Explanation) of C.P.C.
(3.) At this stage, it has been contended that for the fault of the Counsel, the client should not suffer. The plea cannot be accepted in view of the specific provisions referred to above.;