Gujarat High Court High Court

Geetaben vs State on 13 July, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Geetaben vs State on 13 July, 2011
Author: H.K.Rathod,
  
 Gujarat High Court Case Information System 
    
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/5877/2011	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 5877 of 2011
 

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

 

GEETABEN
LALJIBHAI PARMAR - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT THROUGH SECRETARIAT & 3 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
MA PAREKH for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 
MR MAULIK NANAVATI AGP  for Respondent(s) :
1, 
NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1 - 4. 
NOTICE SERVED BY DS
for Respondent(s) :
2, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 13/07/2011 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

1. Heard
learned advocate Mr.M.A.Pareikh for petitioner, learned AGP Mr.Maulik
Nanavati for respondent No.1.

2. The
representation which has been made by petitioner on 3.3.2011
(Page-36) is remained unattended and not decided so far.

3. Therefore,
learned advocate Mr.Parekh submitted that some suitable direction may
be issued to respondents, so they may consider aforesaid
representation on the basis of GR dated 1.5.2000 an 16.2.2006.

4. In
view of these facts, it is directed to respondents to consider
aforesaid representation dated 3.3.2011 made by petitioner and
examine grievance of petitioner keeping in mind GR dated 1.5.2000 an
16.2.2006 and thereafter, to pass appropriate reasoned order in
accordance with law, within a period of 3 months from date of
receiving copy of present order and communicate the decision to
petitioner immediately.

5. In
view of aforesaid observations and directions, present petition is
disposed of without expressing any opinion on merits. Direct service
is permitted.

6. However,
in case if ultimate decision is adverse to petitioner, it is open for
petitioner to challenge the same by filing appropriate proceeding
before appropriate forum in accordance with law.

[
H.K.RATHOD, J. ]

(vipul)

   

Top