Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SA/53/2007 1/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SECOND
APPEAL No. 53 of 2007
=========================================================
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Appellant(s)
Versus
PRADIPBHAI
MULJIBHAI BHATT & 1 - Defendant(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
HEMANT MAKWANA, LD.ASST.GOVERNMENT PLEADER for
Appellant(s) : 1,
MR HS MUNSHAW for Respondent(s) : 1,
None for
Respondent (s) :
2,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE C.K.BUCH
Date
: 13/08/2008
ORAL
ORDER
Heard
Shri Hemant Makwana, learned Assistant Government Pleader, appearing
on behalf of the appellant-State and Shri H.S. Munshaw, learned
counsel appearing for the respondent no.1.
Having
considered the earlier order dated 22nd April 2007 passed
by this Court (Coram : R.S. Garg, J), the present appeal is required
to be admitted.
Hence,
ADMITTED
and the following substantial questions of law are hereby posed for
determination :
Whether
on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, non-conduction
of the inquiry would vitiate the award of the punishment, specially
when Rule 9 of the Rules provides that a major penalty as provided
under Clause 4 to 8 of Rule 6 of the Rules shall not be awarded
without an inquiry, meaning thereby that a minor penalty can be
imposed even without ceremonious inquiry?
Whether
on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, non-examination
of the witnesses etc. would vitiate the proceedings, specially when
an inquiry is not required in view of Rule 9 of the Rules?
Whether
on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, is the plaintiff
right and justified in saying that no opportunity to make
representation was issued to him when undisputedly notices were
given to him, he was placed under suspension, he had filed the suit
challenging the suspension and after receiving other notices, he
amended his plaint?
According
to Shri H.S. Munshaw, the Court was anxious to see that the appeal
is disposed of at an admission stage by dealing with the substantial
questions of law. The respondent no.1 is about to reach the age of
superannuation and therefore, early hearing of the appeal may save
the frustration and the ultimate mis-carriage of justice. So his
request is accepted.
The
Registry is directed to list this appeal for final hearing on 17th
September 2008.
(C.K.
Buch, J)
Aakar
Top