Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/2250/2011 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2250 of 2011
=====================================================
ARVINDBHAI
JINABHAI SOLANKI - Petitioner(s)
Versus
SUPERINTENDENT
OF POLICE & 2 - Respondent(s)
=====================================================
Appearance :
MR
TEJAS P SATTA for Petitioner(s) : 1,
Mr.M.G.Nanavati, learned
Assistant Government Pleader for the State.
None
for Respondent(s) : 1 -
3.
=====================================================
CORAM
:
HON'BLE
SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI
Date
: 03/03/2011
ORAL
ORDER
1. This
petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been
filed with the following prayers:
“(A) This
Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue appropriate writ, direction or
order in the nature of mandamus quashing and setting aside the
arbitrary and illegal order of transfer issued by the respondents
dated 31.1.2011 qua the petitioner.
(B) This
Hon’ble Court be pleased to direct the respondents for allowing the
petitioner to discharge his duty as per the order dated 27.1.2011 on
his original post till the admission and final hearing of this
petition.
(C) This
Hon’ble Court be pleased to pass such other and further order or
orders as may be deemed just and expedient in view of the facts and
circumstances of the case.”
2. At
the very outset, Mr.Tejas P.Satta, learned advocate for the
petitioner prays that interest of justice would be met, if petitioner
is permitted to make a representation to respondent No.1 regarding
the grievances voiced in the petition and the said respondent may be
directed to consider and decide the same.
3. Upon
the above statement being made by the learned advocate for the
petitioner, the following order is passed:
4. The
petitioner is directed to make a representation to respondent No.1,
within a period of one week from today. If the representation is made
within the stipulated period of time, respondent No.1 shall consider
and decide the same, in accordance with law, preferably within a
period of one month,the date of receipt thereof.
5. It
is clarified that while passing this order, the Court has not entered
into the merits of the case.
6. The
petition is disposed of, in the above terms.
Direct
service of this order is permitted.
(Smt.Abhilasha Kumari,J)
arg
Top