IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION No 94 of 1997
--------------------------------------------------------------
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
SAGRAM RAMJIBHAI BAVALIA
--------------------------------------------------------------
Appearance:
Mr.P.B. Bhatt, Assistant GOVERNMENT PLEADER,
for Petitioners
MR SHAILESH K MORI for the Respondent.
--------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : MR.JUSTICE D.G.KARIA
Date of Order: 05/08/97
ORAL ORDER
Rule. Mr.Kakkad, Advocate, waives service of Rule
on behalf of the Respondent. In the facts and
circumstances of the case, rule is finally heard today.
By the Application Exhibit 60 for raising
preliminary issue regarding jurisdiction, the
petitioner-State requested the trial court to raise and
determine the issue as to jurisdiction as a preliminary
one. The learned Judge rejected the said application
Exhibit 60, holding, inter alia, that the Court was of
the view that prima facie, the Court had jurisdiction to
entertain and try the suit and at that stage, it could
not decide. The issue with regard to jurisdiction could
be raised and decided as a preliminary issue having
regard to the provisions of Order 14 Rule 2(2) of the
Code of Civil Procedure. It, inter alia, provides that
where issue, both of law and fact, arises in the Suit and
the Court is of the opinion that the case or any part
thereof may be disposed of on any issue of law only, it
may try that issue first if that issue relates to the
jurisdiction of the Court. In the instant case, the
issue with regard to jurisdiction of the Court is
specifically raised. There are no reasons recorded by
the learned trial Judge while dismissing the Application
Exhibit 60 as to on what basis the Court believed, prima
facie even, that the Court has jurisdiction to try the
suit. It is the specific case of the petitioner-State
that the plaintiff could seek relief, as is sought in the
present suit, under the provisions of the Gujarat Service
Tribunal Act, 1972. The learned Judge has not referred
to all the provisions of the Gujarat Service Tribunal
Act. There is, therefore, clear non-application of mind
in this regard. In the facts and circumstances of the
case, the revision application deserves to be allowed and
is accordingly allowed.
In the result, the Rule is made absolute with no
order as to costs. The order passed below Application
Exhibit 60 is hereby quashed and set aside. Application
Exhibit 60 stands granted. Accordingly, the learned
trial court is directed to try the issue as to
jurisdiction as a preliminary issue.
5th August, 1997( D.G. Karia, J. )
******
(apj)