JUDGMENT
B.J. Shethna, J.
1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. This special appeal is filed against the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by the petitioner on 5.9.2000, whereby, the learned Single Judge has refused to place reliance on the judgment of Division Bench of this Court delivered in Prabhu v. Hindustan Zinc Limited and others CO, wherein, it has been held that since there was an agreement between the parties, the respondents should give suitable appointment to the petitioner considering his educational qualification and experience on the ground that making such order to grant specific performance in this aspect is not the jurisdiction under0icle 226.
3. We are afraid, such a view taken by the learned Single Judge is not sustainable at all. Law on the point is very clear. Whenever the Hon’ble Supreme Court or High Court passes an order, it has to be presumed that all the relevant facts were present in the mind of the Court while deciding the matter. The Division Bench of this Court allowed the special appeal No. 373/95 arising out of the order passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition. Therefore, it was not open to the learned Single Judge to observe that making of such order to grant specific performance in this aspect is not the jurisdiction under Article 226.
4. In view of the above, this special appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and order dated 5.9.2000 passed by the learned Single Judge, dismissing the writ petition with aforesaid observations, is hereby quashed and set aside.
5. The matters is remanded to learned Single Judge with a request to decide the writ petition afresh in light of the judgment of Division Bench of this Court delivered in D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 373/95 on 21.11.1996.