C vs State on 19 March, 2010

Gujarat High Court
C vs State on 19 March, 2010
Author: Ks Jhaveri,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/3020/1990	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3020 of 1990
 

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


 

C
J PANDYA - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT & 3 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance : 
MR
MR ANAND for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 
MRS. KRINA CALLA AGP for Respondent(s) : 1 -
3. 
RULE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 3, 
MR SN SHELAT for
Respondent(s) : 4, 
MRS VD NANAVATI for Respondent(s) :
4, 
=========================================================


 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 19/03/2010 

 

ORAL
ORDER

1. The
issue involved in this petition is covered by a decision of a
Division Bench of this Court rendered in L.P.A. No.518/1985 dated
13.08.1987. The said decision was, subsequently, followed in S.C.A.
No.2901/1987 and allied matters, which came to be disposed of vide
order dated 15.02.2008. The said order dated 15.02.2008 reads as
under;

The
petitioners, in this group of petitions, challenge the action of the
respondents seeking to retire the petitioners at the age of 58 years
as against the Sen Commission’s Report having been accepted by the
respondents, whereby the petitioners claim that they are entitled to
continue in service up to the age of 60 years.

2. Similarly
situated persons had also filed petitions, one of such petitions was
Special Civil Application No. 978/1985 preferred by one Thakorlal
Pranlal Desai. The said petition came to be disposed of with similar
petitions by judgment and order rendered by the learned Single Judge
of this Court from 17th to 21st December,1985,
where all the contentions were considered by the learned Single Judge
and ultimately, the petitions came to be dismissed.

3. It
appears that the said order was challenged before the Division Bench
of this Court in Letters Patent Appeal No. 518/1985, which also came
to be dismissed by judgment and order dated 13th August,
1987.

4. In
light of the above development, the reliefs sought by the petitioners
in these petitions cannot be granted. The petitions, therefore, must
fail and are dismissed. Rule in each petition is discharged. No
orders as to costs. Interim relief, if any, shall stand vacated.

2. Similar
view has also been taken in a reported decision of this Court in the
case of State of Gujarat & Anr. v. S.P. Thakkar, 2004 (4)
G.L.H. 3715.

3. Hence,
this petition stands disposed of in terms of the aforesaid order.
Rule is discharged. Interim relief, if any, stands vacated.

[K.S.JHAVERI,
J.]

Pravin/*

   

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 *