SHETHNA, J. - (1.) LEARNED counsel Shri Udawat for the respondents rai-sed preliminary objection regarding maintainability of this writ petition on the ground of delay and laches and submitted that solely on this ground this petition was required to be dismissed in view of the direct Judgment of this Court (Hon'ble Dr. B. S. Chauhan, J.) M/s. Bhanwar Lal Radha Kishan vs. State of Rajasthan and others (1 ). The copy of the same is produced on record.
(2.) HOWEVER, learned counsel Shri Sharma for the petitioner tried to distinguish that judgment by submitting that in special appeal the Division Bench of this Court has allowed the appeal filed by Anil Kumar (2)This very judgment was also referred to by my learned brother Dr. B. S. Chauhan J. while dismissing the writ petition No. 1679/98 only on the ground of delay and laches. In view of the above, this Court cannot go into the merits of the case and decide as to whether the impugned award was valid or not. An attempt was made to learned counsel Shri Sharma for the petitioner to take me through the merits of the case by submitting that the impugned award was no award in the eye of law, therefore, the same was required to be set aside. As stated earlier, when there is direct judgment of this Court dealing with the same notification and award then this Court cannot distinguish the judgment on the ground that the award was illegal. In my humble opinion, it is not open to this Court to go into the merits of the case particularly when the coordinate Bench of this Court has already decided the earlier petition on the ground of delay and laches. In view of the above discussion, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed in terms of the aforesaid judgment of this Court (Hon'ble Dr. B. S. Chauhan, J.) delivered in S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1679/98 decided on 14. 10. 1998 (supra ). .;