Omprakash Sewda v. State Of Rajasthan

1. For the reasons mentioned in the applications, delay in filing the appeals is condoned. The applications are allowed.

D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 792/2007, D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 801/2007, D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 807/2007, D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 813/2007, D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 814/2007, D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 815/2007 :

2. The writ appeals are not maintainable for the reason impugned order dated 28.2.2017 challenged in SAW No. 792/2017, impugned order dated 21.2.2017 challenged in SAW No. 801/2017, impugned order dated 22.3.2017 challenged in SAW No. 807/2017, impugned order dated 28.2.2017 challenged in SAW No. 813/2017, (impugned order dated 28.2.2017 challenged in SAW No. 814/2017 and impugned order dated 21.2.2017 challenged in SAW No. 815/2017, have been passed by consent. The consent requires respondents to comply with the directions issued in SB Civil Writ Petition No. 750/2017, Mukesh Kumar Tailor v. State of Rajasthan

3. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellants states that the grievance of the appellants is that the directions issued in Mukesh Kumar have not been complied with.

4. Needless to state that the learned Single Judge has directed that the decision in Mukesh Kumar should be complied with by the respondents.

5. The writ appeals are dismissed as not maintainable.