==========================================Appearance vs Heard on 18 September, 2008

Gujarat High Court
==========================================Appearance vs Heard on 18 September, 2008
Author: Bhagwati Prasad,&Nbsp;Honourable D.H.Waghela,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/2888/2008	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2888 of 2008
 

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

UNION
OF INDIA, DEPARTMENT OF TELECOMMUNICATION & IT AND ANOTHER 

 

Versus
 

BAVA
BALDEVGAR SON OF LATE BAVA AMTHAGAR 

 

==========================================Appearance
: 
MR DC SEJPAL
for MR HARIN P RAVAL for the Petitioners
 
PARTY-IN-PERSON  
==========================================
 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 18/09/2008 

 

ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD)

1. Heard
Mr. D.C. Sejpal for MR Harin P. Raval, learned counsel for the
petitioners, and Shri Bava Baldevgar, party-in-person.

2. Having
given our thoughtful consideration, we deem it proper that the
enquiry as ordered by the Central Administrative Tribunal should
proceed from the stage of cross-examination. We are not entering
the merits of the grounds on which the enquiry has been re-ordered,
but, in the interest of justice, we are considering it proper
that enquiry should proceed from the stage of cross-examination.
The enquiry has to be held at the same training center, where the
respondent has already appeared before the Enquiry Officer and he
will appear before the Enquiry Officer on 29.09.2008. Further date
will be given on further proceedings. With the aforesaid
observations, no further orders are required to be passed.

3. We
record the statement of the respondent that he will co-operate fully
in earlier conclusion of the enquiry and shall not even once ask for
an adjournment on any flimsy ground or unnecessarily. The enquiry
should proceed expeditiously.

4. It
is expected that the enquiry shall be concluded as far as
practicable, within a period of two months.

5. The
petition stands disposed accordingly. Notice is discharged. Interim
relief is vacated with no order as to costs.

(BHAGWATI
PRASAD, J.)

(D.H.WAGHELA,
J.)

omkar

   

Top

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *