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