- (1.) The point sought to be canvassed here was that in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution, in the absence of counsel for the petitioner, the Court is empowered only to dismiss a writ petition in default but cannot dispose it of in any other manner.
(2.) On March 29, 1983, two writ petitions being Civil Writ Petitions No. 6838 of 1976 (Smt. Chain Devi v. The State of Punjab and others) and Civil Writ petition No. 6906 of 1976 (Jaswant Singh & another v. The State of Punjab and others) were dismissed in the absence of the counsel for the petitioners Mr. U.S. Sahni on the ground that the petitioners were not entitled to the relief claimed, as an equally efficacious alternative remedy was available to them by way of appeal and revision under the Punjab Land Revenue Act. Counsel for the respondents were however present when this order was passed.
(3.) It was on May 16, 1983 that the present application was filed under Section 151 read with Order 41 Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code and the Writ Jurisdiction Rules, 1976 seeking the setting aside of the orders passed in Writ Petitions referred to above on March 29, 1983 and for the cases being reheared on merits.;