Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/10729/2010 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10729 of 2010
=========================================================
AKHIL
GUJARAT GENERAL MAZDROO SANGH - Petitioner(s)
Versus
DIRECTOR
OF MUNICIPALITIES & 2 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
ND SONGARA for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR MAULIK G NANAVATI,ASST.GOVERNMENT PLEADER
for Respondent(s) : 1,
NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1, 3,
MR
DEEPAK P SANCHELA for Respondent(s) :
2,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HON'BLE
SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI
Date
: 23/06/2011
ORAL ORDER
1. This
petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been
filed, with the following prayers :
“(A) Your
Lordships may kindly be pleased to admit and allow this petition.
(B) Your
Lordships may kindly be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus and/or
any other appropriate writ, order or
direction to direct the respondents to grant the benefits of
regularization, pay scales, increments, benefits of pay commissions
to employees shown at Annexure-A to this petition from their initial
appointments.
(C) Your
Lordships may kindly be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus and/or
any other writ, order or direction
to direct the respondent No.1 to grant sanction/approval for
extending the benefits to the employees of respondent No.2 and 3 at
annexure A from the date of their initial appointment.
(D) During
the pendancy of this petition Your Lordships may kindly be pleased to
direct the respondents to extend the benefits of regularization to
the employees shown at annexure A to this petition.”
2. Heard
Mr.N.D.Songara, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.Maulik G.
Nanavati, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent No.1
and Mr.Deepak Sanchela, learned advocate for respondent No.2 and
perused the averments made in the petition and the material on
record.
3. At
this stage, Mr.N.D.Songara, learned counsel for the petitioner states
that the petitioner may be permitted to make a representation to
respondent No.2 and the said respondent may be directed to consider
and decide the same.
4. Upon
the above statement being made by the learned counsel for the
petitioner, the following order is passed :
The
petitioner is permitted to make a representation to respondent No.2.
If such a representation is made, respondent No.2 may consider and
decide the same, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as
possible.
It
is made clear that while passing this order, the Court has not
entered into the merits of the case.
The
petition is disposed of, in the above terms.
Notice
is discharged. There shall be no
orders as to costs.
(Smt.
Abhilasha Kumari, J.)
~gaurav~
Top