Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/17657/2003 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 17657 of 2003
With
CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 7407 of 2008
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 17657 of 2003
=========================================================
ARVINDBHAI
PAMABHAI PARMAR - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
CB DASTOOR for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MS BHAVIKA KOTECHA, AGP for Respondent(s) : 1 -
2.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL
Date
: 08/07/2008
ORAL
ORDER
Upon
hearing Mr. Dastoor learned Counsel for the petitioner and more
particularly in view of the facts stated in the Civil Application,
it is apparent that licence for which the claim was sought to be
made by the petitioner has in any case expired in the year 2005. As
per the information given to the petitioner copy whereof is produced
at annexure C with the Civil Application, it is also apparent that
the fresh advertisement has been issued by Mamlatdar, Limbdi for
giving licence of stamp vendor and as per the petitioner, he has
applied for such licence.
Under
these circumstances, the cause of the petitioner, so far as it
relates to subject matter of main Special Civil Application No.
17657 of 2003 would not survive and the main Special Civil
Application can be said as having become infructuous.
Mr.
Dastoor learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner however,
submitted that the petitioner has applied for the licence and
pursuant to the advertisement, copy whereof is produced at annexure
D, page 9 of the compilation of the Civil Application and he
submitted that this Court may direct for consideration of the
application of the petitioner.
In
my view it is an independent aspect and even otherwise also the
authority would be required to consider the application of all
eligible candidates together with the application of the petitioner
if made. Further, the decision is yet to be taken by the authority
for grant of licence pursuant to the fresh advertisement. Therefore,
at this stage any direction may prejudice the rights of other
candidates, who may be similarly situated. After the decision is
taken by the Mamlatdar, in the event the petitioner is aggrieved,
and if law permits, the petitioner may challenge such decision in
accordance with law.
In
view of the above, subject to the aforesaid observation, the
petition is disposed of as having become infructuous.
Rights
of the petitioner shall also stand governed, as per the observation
made hereinabove and hence, the Civil Application would not survive,
and shall stand disposed of accordingly.
(JAYANT PATEL, J.)
Suresh*
Top