Gujarat High Court High Court

Kasamkhan vs Gujarat on 16 April, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Kasamkhan vs Gujarat on 16 April, 2010
Author: Ks Jhaveri,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/7785/1995	 1/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 7785 of 1995
 

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


 

KASAMKHAN
NOORMOHMED THEBA - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

GUJARAT
WATER SUPPLY SEWERAGE BOARD - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance : 
MR
SHAKEEL A QURESHI for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 
MR KH BAXI for Respondent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
		
	

 

	
       Date : 16/04/2010 

 

 
ORAL
ORDER

1. This
Court on 14.09.1995, had passed the following order :-

Learned
counsel for the petitioner has made a mention that in the order dated
13th September, 1995, there is discrepancy with regard to
the date of incident and the certain words used after the date of
20th June, 1995. The pen mistakes in the order dated 13th
September, 1995, therefore, deserve to be corrected.

2.
The order dated 13th September, 1995, therefore, be read
as under :-

It
is submitted by the learned counsel Mr. S.A. Qureshi, for the
petitioner that the petitioner’s service has been terminated by the
order dated 20th June, 1995 from the post of Watchman. The
order dated 20th June, 1995 is on the face of it, and
casts aspersion against the petitioner with regard to the incident
dated 9th June, 1995, for which no charge-sheet has been
given nor any inquiry is held in accordance with rules.

Rule
returnable on 9th October, 1995. In the meanwhile, the
operation of the impugned order dated 20th June, 1995
terminating the services of the petitioner shall remain stayed, and
the petitioner shall be allowed to continue in service as he was
continuing prior to the passing of the order dated 20th
June, 1995.

Direct
Service is permitted.

2. In
view of the aforesaid order, the parties will be governed by the
said order. It is however, observed that it will be open for the
respondent to take action against the petitioner for any of the
misconduct which is committed by the petitioner apart from the
subject matter of the petition. The petition stands disposed of
accordingly. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.

[K.S.

JHAVERI, J.]

/phalguni/

   

Top