Gujarat High Court High Court

Dineshbhai vs The on 7 July, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Dineshbhai vs The on 7 July, 2011
Author: H.K.Rathod,
  
 Gujarat High Court Case Information System 
    
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/5875/2011	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 5875 of 2011
 

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

 

DINESHBHAI
V KODIYATAR - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

THE
CHAIRMAN & 3 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
DEEPAK P SANCHELA for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 
MR DG SHUKLA for Respondent(s) : 1, 
MR KAMAL
TRIVEDI, ADVOCATE GENERAL for respondent : 2-3  
NOTICE SERVED BY
DS for Respondent(s) : 2 -
4. 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 07/07/2011 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

1. Heard
learned advocate Mr.Deepak P. Sanchela for petitioner, learned
advocate Mr.D.G.Shukla for respondent No.1, who has filed
affidavit-in-reply against present petition which is at Page-108. On
behalf of respondent Nos.2 and 3, learned Advocate General Mr.Kamal
Trivedi is appearing. However, there is no reply on behalf of
respondent Nos.2 and 3.

2. Under
the circumstances, the matter is adjourned to 26.7.2011.

3. Meantime,
respondent Nos.2 and 3 may file affidavit-in-reply, if they so
desired, on or before 26.7.2011, with an advance copy to other side.

4. Learned
advocate Mr.Sanchela for petitioner submitted that present petitioner
has made application to the Gujarat Public Service Commission on
26.2.2008 and 13.4.2011 wherein a specific stand has been taken that
petitioner is belonged to schedule tribe and in similar case of
Mr.Parbatbhai Amrabhai Chavada, such benefit is extended by the
Gujarat Public Service Commission.

5. Learned
advocate Mr.Shukla appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 also makes
it clear that aforesaid statement of facts have been denied by
respondent No.1 in affidavit-in-reply. Against which, no rejoinder is
filed by petitioner.

[
H.K.RATHOD, J. ]

(vipul)

   

Top