Gujarat High Court High Court

Pathan vs State on 13 June, 2008

Gujarat High Court
Pathan vs State on 13 June, 2008
Bench: K.M.Thaker
  
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	

 
 


	 

SCA/8074/2008	 4/ 4	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 8074 of 2008
 

 


 

 
=========================================================

 

PATHAN
ALIKHAN ABDULSATTARKHAN (MINOR) THRO. HIS FATHER - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT THRO. SECRETARY, & 3 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
MUKUL SINHA for
Petitioner(s) : 1,                                              MR
RAJESH P MANKAD for Petitioner(s) : 1, 
MR KL PANDYA ASSISTANT
GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1, 
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for
Respondent(s) : 1 -
4. 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER
		
	

 

	  
Date : 13/06/2008 

 

 
 
 


 

ORAL
ORDER

In
the present petition, by order dated 6th June, 2008,
Notice was issued. Notice was made returnable on 12th
June, 2008. On 12th June, 2008, the respondents could not
clarify various issues arising from the impugned order dated 22nd
May, 2008 and for enabling the respondents to bring on record the
necessary details which may clarify the issues arising from the
impugned order, the proceedings were adjourned to today. When the
matter is taken up today, Mr. Rajesh P. Mankad, learned counsel for
the petitioner submitted that during the pendency of the petition, an
order dated 1st June, 2008 came to be served on the
petitioner in the afternoon on 12th June, 2008, (after the
petition was adjourned yesterday) whereby the admission of the
petitioner has been cancelled. Though prima facie,
it appears difficult to accept the statement that the order dated 1st
June 2008 would be served on the petitioner after almost 11 days i.e.
on 12th June, 2008, since the said statement is made by
way of amendment, it is for the present, accepted and thus it is
considered appropriate at this stage, that the operation of the said
communication dated 1st June, 2008 be suspended,
otherwise, the petition would be rendered infructuous and
irreversible situation would arise. Hence, further implementation and
operation of the communication dated 1st June, 2008 is
suspended.

Mr. Mankad, learned
advocate for the petitioner submitted that the exams are to commence
on 16th June, 2008 and if the petitioner is not allowed to
appear in the examination, then one year of the petitioner would be
wasted and even if subsequently the petition is allowed,
petitioner’s.

Under the circumstances,
only as on ad-hoc and on interim arrangement, it is directed
that the petitioner may be permitted to appear in the examination
which are to commence from 16th June, 2008. It is however,
clarified that this order and/or will not create any right or equity
of any nature in favour of the petitioner and the petitioner would
not claim any right or equity including the claim that his results
may be declared, merely because he has been allowed to appear in the
examination by way of ad-hoc and interim arrangement on the
basis of this order. Likewise, this very fact, i.e. the petitioner by
virtue of this ad-hoc and interim arrangement, is allowed to
appear in the examination and will be answering the examination, also
would not create any right or equity in his favour. The respondents
shall place on record by way of affidavit-in-reply the necessary
material and details which would appropriately and satisfactorily
reply the two issues raised by the petitioner with regard to the
premise on which the impugned order has been passed. The
affidavit-in-reply along with the said material shall be brought on
record on or before 17th June, 2008. A copy thereof shall
also be supplied to the petitioner on 17th June, 2008.
Considering the fact the petitioner has been granted permission to
appear in the examination, only because of the fact that the matter
came to be considered only yesterday and had to be adjourned to
enable the respondents to put on record the details and material and
the examination are to commence on 16th June, 2008, it
would be necessary to hold the further hearing of the petition
peremptorily on 19th June, 2008. The petitioner shall not,
on any ground, ask for adjournment on 19th June, 2008.

S.O. to 19th
June, 2008.

[K.M. THAKER, J.]

/phalguni/